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."I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing."
"It's very easy to install, and it's very easy to code and develop the script."
"The solution helps by detecting bottlenecks."
"Very user-friendly and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature for us is the available information on the forums and to be able to discuss and get answers from the people that are involved in using this tool."
"It is scalable. You can scale up to 1,000 users in JMeter. If you can put up four slave servers, you can easily ramp up to 1,000 users."
"This solution is very user-friendly, and allows for a lot of data capture when testing."
"We use Apache JMeter for load testing, where we provide the throughput time."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"It's simple to set up."
"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"In future releases, it would be helpful if there was an integration with ALM Octane."
"Apache JMeter may have difficulty recognizing dynamic objects in some critical cases, which can lead to challenges in terms of object identification."
"Self-healing and page rendering for the end-users are not available in Apache JMeter."
"At present, if the number of virtual users increases beyond 10,000 when testing, then it results in a Java heap which causes the solution to crash."
"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."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"We would like some reporting and analysis tools to be added to this solution."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"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."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"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."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
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.