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."We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"This solution is easier to use than any other tool in the market; there is not even a requirement to learn a lot of scripting in order to use it."
"What I like best about Apache JMeter is its user-friendly GUI because even if you don't have very good coding knowledge or understanding, or even if you don't come from a development background, you can still use the solution with just a few clicks. This is what's unique about Apache JMeter, in comparison with other tools in the market. As Apache JMeter is open source, when there's a missing feature, you can search in several community blogs for plugins that you can use to modify Apache JMeter to meet your requirements, and this is another advantage."
"The most valuable feature in JMeter is the Thread Group, which helps us to see whether the performance is good."
"I like the fact that JMeter integrates well with other tools."
"Apache JMeter is quite flexible."
"JMeter lets us generate virtual users and T-load, per our requirements. It's easy to configure and adjusting the virtual users according to the DPS we want to achieve."
"Apache JMeter is well-known and widely used among developers, particularly on popular developer forums. While it may not have the most user-friendly interface, it offers strong support through official manuals and various articles from companies providing load testing services. The tool is free, has a substantial community, and serves as a fundamental choice for testers, especially those new to performance testing. While other tools like K6 may be more developer-oriented, JMeter's affordability and accessibility make it suitable for those without extensive performance testing experience."
"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
"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."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"In this tool, automation in general is almost non-existent. Everything is done manually."
"What needs improvement in Apache JMeter is the very high load requirements when you want to scale it beyond certain thresholds. For example, small to mid-range testing is very easily done with Apache JMeter, but if you scale and increase the load, then it would be a problem because the tool consumes a lot of resources, probably because Apache JMeter provides an enriched UI experience, so it consumes a lot of memory and requires high CPU usage. This means you have to manage your infrastructure, or else you'll have high overhead expenses. As Apache JMeter is a heavyweight tool, that is an area for improvement, though I'm unsure if Apache can do something about it because it could be a result of the way it's architected. What I'd like to see from Apache JMeter in the future is for it to transition to the cloud, as a lot of cloud technologies emerge around the globe, and a lot of people prefer cloud-based solutions or cloud-native tools. Even if a company has a legacy system, it's still possible to transition to the cloud. I've worked with a company that was an on-premise company that moved to the cloud and became cloud-native. If Apache JMeter could transition to the cloud, similar to k6, then it could help lessen the intense resource consumption that's currently happening in Apache JMeter."
"Apache should have a graphic interface."
"We would like some reporting and analysis tools to be added to this solution."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"It has some proxy-based dependencies which require specific proxies to be set up or disabled, which causes problems."
"The reports in Apache JMeter could improve."
"Until now, JMeter is not supporting most of the protocols."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
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 Ranorex Studio. 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.
