We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and HCL AppScan based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The metrics part of it and the ability to write your custom code to do some specific tests in the performance testing space are the most valuable features."
"Apache JMeter is quite flexible."
"When someone in our organization wants to test web applications, they use Apache JMeter since they face no hurdles while using the solution."
"It is cost-effective and simple to use."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"Scripting with the solution is good."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free."
"It provides a better integration for our ecosystem."
"IBM AppScan has made our work easy, as we can do four to five scans of websites at a time, which saves time when it comes to vulnerability."
"The security and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"This solution saves us time due to the low number of false positives detected."
"It is easy it is to use. It is quick to find things, because of the code scanning tools. It's quite simple to use and it is very good the way it reports the findings."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The solution is easy to use."
"At times when we overload the application, it gets stuck...After the solution gets stuck due to overloading, we have to restart our computers. In short, the solution keeps crashing."
"The UI of the solution needs to be better. The UI takes up a lot of our bandwidth."
"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."
"Running JMeter in GUI mode uses a lot of memory, which means we need to switch to a non-GUI mode when using a heavy load."
"Apache JMeter may have difficulty recognizing dynamic objects in some critical cases, which can lead to challenges in terms of object identification."
"Apache JMeter's UI can be made more colorful."
"Automation is difficult in JMeter."
"You really need a technical team in order to really utilize the product."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"The pricing has room for improvement."
"They could add a software component analysis tool."
"IBM Security AppScan needs to add performance optimization for quickly scanning the target web applications."
"There are so many lines of code with so many different categories that I am likely to get lost. "
"It has crashed at times."
"If HCL AppScan is able to alert the clients over email once the scan is complete, it would be great. Right now, HCL AppScan doesn't let me know if the scanning part is finished or not, because of which I have to come back and check mostly."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while HCL AppScan is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 41 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while HCL AppScan is rated 7.8. 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 HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and OWASP Zap.
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.