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."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."
"The reporting features are really good. There's a lot less latency than other solutions."
"The solution has good transition controllers and distributed testing."
"The most valuable features are the ability to capture the entire traffic of particular pages and the proper readability of entire pages and entire APIs."
"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."
"It's a free tool."
"The product helps me get the expected performance from applications or servers and reduces costs. It also enhances the performance of the services and helped them reach their ultimate capacity."
"The solution helps by detecting bottlenecks."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"Selenium integration."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"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."
"The plug-ins make the reports heavy and they have to be run in non-GUI mode."
"The initial setup is complex and needs to be upgraded."
"The installation needs some work. It could be simplified."
"Given that Apache JMeter is a free and open-source tool, documentation improvement may not be a major concern, as it is mostly contributed on a voluntary basis. The essential information is already available. However, in terms of the interface, there are occasional bugs, and the tool may not address them as quickly as some users would like. Fixing defects and bugs might take a considerable amount of time, with users sometimes having to wait for several months or even a year for the next release to address specific issues."
"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."
"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."
"In terms of platform support, they need to extend the support for backend platforms and more of the legacy types of platforms."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 72 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.