We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Quality Manager and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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."
"RQM's best features are integration with test automation and performance testing."
"RQM is something that we use everyday, so it has to be up and running, otherwise we would lose everything."
"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."
"We can measure metrics like hits per second and detect deviations or issues through graphs. We can filter out response times based on timings and identify spikes in the database or AWS reports."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"It allows you to work out how well you are doing project-wise because you see the number of scripts done, the number of tests run, and whether you have mapped all your requirements to it."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"We haven't had an outage since we started using the solution."
"We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals."
"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"Organizing the test cases is tedious. There is no mechanism to keep and maintain the test cases as hierarchy. This should be seriously addressed."
"While RQM allows for running tests and viewing results, it could be further enhanced in terms of performance and speed."
"Integration capabilities with other vendors' tools should improve."
"Mainly Quality Assurance and DevOps, but of course the whole company and management areas with more knowledge of quality and client success approach."
"RQM could be improved by adding a feature that allows test requirements to be selected when creating a task plan."
"It would be helpful if we could assign a hierarchy to a group of test cases."
"Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition."
"I think it's fine from a performance perspective but usability is something that needs improvement."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"Canned reports are always a challenge and a question with customers because customers want to see sexy reports."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Rational Quality Manager is ranked 15th in Load Testing Tools with 11 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Load Testing Tools with 81 reviews. IBM Rational Quality Manager is rated 7.6, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. 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 Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". IBM Rational Quality Manager is most compared with OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and Tricentis qTest, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter. See our IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.