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 performance of the solution is excellent."
"The biggest thing I liked about it is that there is a huge user base out there, and being shareware and being Apache, if I have any question on how to get something done, I get 18 different answers. Out of those, there would be at least a few good approaches for what I was trying to do. So, the support system out there is most valuable."
"Very user-friendly and easy to use."
"The solution has good transition controllers and distributed testing."
"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."
"The reports and analysis tools are very good. They are the solution's most valuable features."
"The reporting features are really good. There's a lot less latency than other solutions."
"We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."
"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"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."
"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."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"The user interface is a little bit tricky."
"JMeter output reports can be difficult to understand without training."
"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."
"If JMeter could integrate with the EPM solution, it would be great. It could also be improved by offering more integrations for security. For example, most applications are secure with OpenID Connect protocols."
"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."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"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."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"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."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"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."
Apache JMeter is ranked 3rd in API Testing Tools with 81 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 Postman, BlazeMeter, 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.