We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Test Workbench and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"The solution helps my clients save time. It is easier to capture reports and improves product quality. The product helps to identify customer defects during performance tests and reduces workloads. The product has improved my client's user interaction. It has reduced peak load times."
"The solution is quite stable."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"Improvement wise, the pipeline should be enabled. It should be embedded as part of the tool itself rather than going with third-party tools. Monitoring should be more effective as well."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"Compared to some other vendors, there is a lack of community support."
"The tool should consider releasing a SaaS version since it makes more sense nowadays."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Test Workbench is ranked 18th in Performance Testing Tools while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews. IBM Rational Test Workbench is rated 7.6, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Test Workbench writes "Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". IBM Rational Test Workbench is most compared with HCL OneTest, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance 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.