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."JMeter's most valuable feature is the RegEx Extractor."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"It gives accurate results and recommendations that we can implement to enhance the performance of websites."
"The solution is scalable."
"We find the load testing feature valuable."
"We use Apache JMeter for load testing, where we provide the throughput time."
"It's very easy to install, and it's very easy to code and develop the script."
"JMeter is easy to use for a user who doesn't have too much knowledge of programming or certain languages."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"The plug-ins make the reports heavy and they have to be run in non-GUI mode."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner we can go from the UI and we can configure it. There is no such feature in Apache JMeter. There should be UI-based recording history or logs."
"JMeter should be more stable. Every time there is a new release coming up, a lot of its older functionalities or the new functionalities that are brought in are not very well-documented. It should be documented properly, and there should be proper use cases."
"I sometimes found the documentation to be not as explanatory as I would've liked it. In the cases that I can think of, I was looking for a rather hand-holding approach with Step A, B, and C, but then I realized that with a product that is open source like this, you can't do handholding. That is because there are so many different uses and different unique environments and setups for it, but I remember thinking a few times that if they only just said this."
"There are certain things like we can't merge custom metrics into the JMeter reports. We're limited to JMeter metrics, and other server metrics can't be integrated with JMeter dashboard. This forces us to rely on another tool."
"They should improve the solution on its UI front."
"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."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
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.