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 solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"Due to process automation, I don't have to prepare reports, making it the perfect solution."
"The most valuable feature in JMeter is the Thread Group, which helps us to see whether the performance is good."
"User-friendly and open source."
"It's easy to set up."
"The solution helps by detecting bottlenecks."
"The thread groups, samplers, and listeners, which are all determined by the script's requirements, are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jenkins and the reporting."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"In terms of platform support, they need to extend the support for backend platforms and more of the legacy types of platforms."
"If JMeter could provide a web version of editing, that would be good."
"The reporting section of the solution can be better."
"In future releases, it would be helpful if there was an integration with ALM Octane."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"Report generation needs to be improved. It is quite difficult to get to."
"We're like the solution to be more user-friendly."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"They should include AI-based testing features."
"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."
"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
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.