We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The most valuable feature of this solution is being able to launch many requests and scheduling simulating human interactions with the application."
"It is very quick and user-friendly."
"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."
"I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing."
"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."
"JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process."
"Apache JMeter is well-known and widely used among developers, particularly on popular developer forums. While it may not have the most user-friendly interface, it offers strong support through official manuals and various articles from companies providing load testing services. The tool is free, has a substantial community, and serves as a fundamental choice for testers, especially those new to performance testing. While other tools like K6 may be more developer-oriented, JMeter's affordability and accessibility make it suitable for those without extensive performance testing experience."
"The most valuable feature in JMeter is the Thread Group, which helps us to see whether the performance is good."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals."
"It allows you to work out how well you are doing project-wise because you see the number of scripts done, the number of tests run, and whether you have mapped all your requirements to it."
"We can book load generators."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"It offers easy integration with third-party tools like Dynatrace, Splunk, etc."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"The solution needs to improve reporting. Currently, there is not enough automation involved with the feature. For example, there should be an automatic way of saving reports."
"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."
"The initial setup is complex and needs to be upgraded."
"It should be easier to combine multiple scripts. If you have multiple scripts, you need to write a new script to combine those scripts. The virtual user generator is slow."
"If the solution was GUI based, I believe that it would be more versatile."
"One of the drawbacks of JMeter is that it can't handle a large amount of load, which forces us to switch to other tools when we need to load more than a 5,000 or 10,000 user load."
"It has some proxy-based dependencies which require specific proxies to be set up or disabled, which causes problems."
"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."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. 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 OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
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.
