We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester and TestRail based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools."It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"The most valuable features are the reporting in the dashboard and the general way in which we can create test runs is helpful."
"The ability to time test runs gives the tester the ability to compare calculated times to actual times it takes for a test case to run."
"I use the product to create test cases and share them with my team and manager."
"Integration with Confluence and JIRA."
"The product helps us create test cases and reports."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the dashboard."
"I use the solution for test management."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility, ease of use for writing new test cases, the test plans, and the composition."
"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."
"The product is not focused on synthetic data creation. I would also like to see more integrations with other platforms."
"I've encountered at some point, some difficulties on the administration side, but I don't remember exactly what they were."
"Better prediction of text."
"The test suite management has room for improvement as well as better reporting."
"It would be nice to have a description section when creating the test scenario itself so I can indicate what the configuration should be."
"The TestRail API to integrate reporting of automated tests is complete, but requires many requests to identify the appropriate entry."
"TestRail should improve its pricing."
"It's not easy to create a custom report. It's not straightforward. A good improvement would be if there was a way to report and create a custom report without using a plugin or scripting language."
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Performance Tester is ranked 24th in Test Management Tools while TestRail is ranked 3rd in Test Management Tools with 21 reviews. IBM Rational Performance Tester is rated 7.6, while TestRail is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Performance Tester writes "We can edit captured transactions and organize them by those for which we require performance metrics, but it lacks a set of manuals or guides that would take out some guess work". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TestRail writes "A tool that provides effective test management and real-time reporting capabilities". IBM Rational Performance Tester is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas TestRail is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, TFS, Tricentis qTest, Sealights and Tricentis Tosca.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.