We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Quality Manager and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's very reliable as a solution."
"It allows user to add whichever widget (predefined) based on the need. It has integration with CCM and RM to achieve traceability."
"Reusability and integration capabilities which make it a great choice for organizations that use a variety of development tools and platforms."
"The most valuable feature is the RFT because it allows us to automate manual test cases."
"Integration with the other professional tools is a very strong advantage, so that we can have a traceability between the requirements and defects in Rational Team Concert. That's the most important aspect."
"RQM's best features are integration with test automation and performance testing."
"Latest features include versioning of testings which can be great when used for multiple releases of a product."
"The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing."
"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."
"It's a fast product, so you don't have much trouble in terms of maintenance overhead. You don't want to just look into configuring load generators, look for upgrades, and end up having that take up a lot of your time. With this solution, you just log in and you start using it. This means that there is a huge benefit in terms of the overhead of maintaining the infrastructure and the maintenance effort."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"The solution can scale."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."
"While RQM allows for running tests and viewing results, it could be further enhanced in terms of performance and speed."
"I think it's fine from a performance perspective but usability is something that needs improvement."
"It would be helpful if we could assign a hierarchy to a group of test cases."
"Mainly Quality Assurance and DevOps, but of course the whole company and management areas with more knowledge of quality and client success approach."
"Organizing the test cases is tedious. There is no mechanism to keep and maintain the test cases as hierarchy. This should be seriously addressed."
"Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition."
"Currently, the user interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"RQM could be improved by adding a feature that allows test requirements to be selected when creating a task plan."
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
"I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check."
"There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other."
"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"The product must provide agents to monitor servers."
"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"An area for improvement is analytics on why response times are slow from certain countries."
IBM Rational Quality Manager is ranked 15th in Load Testing Tools with 11 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Load Testing Tools with 39 reviews. IBM Rational Quality Manager is rated 7.6, while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Quality Manager writes "Scalable and Stable solution with good integration function and support team". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". IBM Rational Quality Manager is most compared with OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and Tricentis Tosca, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad, BlazeMeter and Apache JMeter. See our IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load Testing 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.