We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The performance of the solution is excellent."
"It's very easy to install, and it's very easy to code and develop the script."
"The scripting ability is most valuable. It is easy to use. There is a UI, and you can go in there and figure those things out. After you've got a good set of tests, you basically have a scripted document that you can grab and execute in a pipeline. It is pretty quick to set up, and you can scale it and version control it."
"Apache JMeter is quite flexible."
"User-friendly and open source."
"Scripting with the solution is good."
"The features that I appreciate are quite basic. It is easy to ramp up the threads and start calling the application. A lot of connectors can already be found within Apache JMeter, but we are not using the entire set because the integration between the customers and platform is based on HTTP. We are just going to produce lots of HTTP sequences."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."
"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
"In this tool, automation in general is almost non-existent. Everything is done manually."
"The user interface is a little bit tricky."
"Automation is difficult in JMeter."
"Apache JMeter could use improvement in reporting. Currently, it isn't easy to generate reports in PDF format. While receiving reports in PDF format is possible, it requires a lot of customization. Additionally, when comparing the load test to others solutions it could improve."
"Apache JMeter may have difficulty recognizing dynamic objects in some critical cases, which can lead to challenges in terms of object identification."
"In terms of platform support, they need to extend the support for backend platforms and more of the legacy types of platforms."
"There are certain things like we can't merge custom metrics into the JMeter reports. We're limited to JMeter metrics, and other server metrics can't be integrated with JMeter dashboard. This forces us to rely on another tool."
"JMeter's reporting is extremely rudimentary. The fundamental reporting mechanisms need to be drastically improved. It doesn't utilize an automatic session management mechanism or methods other tools use like parsing cookies and variables. Everything needs to be done manually. There's no automation."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason."
Apache JMeter is ranked 3rd in API Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 4th in API Testing Tools with 89 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and OpenText LoadRunner Professional, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API 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.
