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."Apache JMeter is stable."
"JMeter's most valuable feature is the RegEx Extractor."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"It is open source as well as relatively extendable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features. Its deployment is also very easy."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is being able to launch many requests and scheduling simulating human interactions with the application."
"The metrics part of it and the ability to write your custom code to do some specific tests in the performance testing space are the most valuable features."
"JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process."
"Due to process automation, I don't have to prepare reports, making it the perfect solution."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"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."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"It will be much easier, and beneficial for the individual to run it on their own machines rather than having a high-end infrastructure, more CPUs, or more memory that has been consumed by Apache JMeter."
"There could be improvements in terms of memory utilization. We are going to migrate away from JMeter in the near future."
"We would like more documentation to be provided for the advanced level features that are available in this solution, in order to improve development."
"In terms of setup, it could be nicer, to be honest. Sometimes, I get a little bit lost."
"JMeter is lagging when it comes to GUI performance testing because we need to install some third-party plugins for recording the GUI script, and the performance isn't very reliable."
"The solution needs to improve reporting. Currently, there is not enough automation involved with the feature. For example, there should be an automatic way of saving reports."
"JMeter output reports can be difficult to understand without training."
"One of the drawbacks of JMeter is that it can't handle a large amount of load, which forces us to switch to other tools when we need to load more than a 5,000 or 10,000 user load."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"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, 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.