We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."JMeter is a free tool with a large user population, which comes in handy because we have a vast knowledge base to tap into when needed. It's also easier to hire consultants who know JMeter."
"A lot of things are valuable. It is free. It has a lot of features, such as report generation and integration with CI/CD, which makes it very competitive with the other paid solutions available in the market. It is a good solution."
"Very user-friendly and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is being able to launch many requests and scheduling simulating human interactions with the application."
"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."
"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."
"When there's a high number of TPS I can achieve more transactions per seconds given the hyper-limitations."
"The scripting ability is most valuable. It is easy to use. There is a UI, and you can go in there and figure those things out. After you've got a good set of tests, you basically have a scripted document that you can grab and execute in a pipeline. It is pretty quick to set up, and you can scale it and version control it."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"It should start supporting the presentation layer. It currently provides performance testing specifically at the application and API level. It can be extended to the presentation layer, which includes mainly Angular and React frameworks. It should also be easy to use and easy to train people."
"In terms of setup, it could be nicer, to be honest. Sometimes, I get a little bit lost."
"The solution is not user-friendly, there is no framework for autocorrelation or parameterization."
"The UI needs some work. The first time I used JMeter, I couldn't record the full scenario to mimic the user experience. Since then, they have introduced some plugins and a third-party tool called BlazeMeter."
"There could be improvements in terms of memory utilization. We are going to migrate away from JMeter in the near future."
"In future releases, it would be helpful if there was an integration with ALM Octane."
"We would like more documentation to be provided for the advanced level features that are available in this solution, in order to improve development."
"I need to consider it further because as features increase, it might become more complicated, and my goal has always been simplicity. Currently, I have to focus on other tasks, and I'm handling multiple responsibilities, so I can't juggle everything at once. However, if you ask me, I believe EJB covers most functionalities that are crucial. One improvement I'd suggest is adding a graphical aspect to the Gateway, making it a bit more colorful. Unlike JMeter, which lacks color, having a bit of color in the graphical aspects would be beneficial. Overall, for the essential features, EJB should work fine."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 70 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. 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 SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish.
We monitor all Performance 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.