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 most valuable features are the ability to capture the entire traffic of particular pages and the proper readability of entire pages and entire APIs."
"The thread groups, samplers, and listeners, which are all determined by the script's requirements, are the most valuable features of this solution."
"We like that Apache JMeter has different features and different plugins and that they are free of charge."
"JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process."
"Scripting with the solution is good."
"A lot of things are valuable. It is free. It has a lot of features, such as report generation and integration with CI/CD, which makes it very competitive with the other paid solutions available in the market. It is a good solution."
"Apache JMeter is quite flexible."
"JMeter's most valuable feature is the RegEx Extractor."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"They can improve it a little bit in terms of distribution load testing. We struggled with it during the distribution. In terms of reporting, runtime monitoring is not currently included, and it should be included. They can also improve it on the reporting side in terms of the comparison of the reports. They can also focus more on integration with CI/CD. Currently, people are using their own customized tools. It would be nice if Apache can provide some standard tools and procedures for integration with CI/CD tools like DPR. There are some tools, but it would be nice if official standard tools and procedures are available."
"It should be easier to combine multiple scripts. If you have multiple scripts, you need to write a new script to combine those scripts. The virtual user generator is slow."
"The tool should be made a bit more robust, and better support should be made available."
"The initial setup is complex and needs to be upgraded."
"In terms of platform support, they need to extend the support for backend platforms and more of the legacy types of platforms."
"In future releases, it would be helpful if there was an integration with ALM Octane."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"Until now, JMeter is not supporting most of the protocols."
"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."
"[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."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on specialist resources."
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, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, 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.