We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and Cavisson NetStorm based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."JMeter lets us generate virtual users and T-load, per our requirements. It's easy to configure and adjusting the virtual users according to the DPS we want to achieve."
"I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free."
"It's stable and reliable."
"It is open source as well as relatively extendable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features. Its deployment is also very easy."
"The distributed load testing is very good with Apache JMeter."
"We like that Apache JMeter has different features and different plugins and that they are free of charge."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jenkins and the reporting."
"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"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 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."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"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 future releases, it would be helpful if there was an integration with ALM Octane."
"It has some proxy-based dependencies which require specific proxies to be set up or disabled, which causes problems."
"Improving JMeter's sync time would be beneficial."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
Earn 20 points
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Load Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Cavisson NetStorm is ranked 19th in Load Testing Tools. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while Cavisson NetStorm is rated 9.4. 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 Cavisson NetStorm writes "Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and OpenText LoadRunner Professional, whereas Cavisson NetStorm is most compared with . See our Apache JMeter vs. Cavisson NetStorm report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.