We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"A lot of things are valuable. It is free. It has a lot of features, such as report generation and integration with CI/CD, which makes it very competitive with the other paid solutions available in the market. It is a good solution."
"The features that I appreciate are quite basic. It is easy to ramp up the threads and start calling the application. A lot of connectors can already be found within Apache JMeter, but we are not using the entire set because the integration between the customers and platform is based on HTTP. We are just going to produce lots of HTTP sequences."
"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."
"When there's a high number of TPS I can achieve more transactions per seconds given the hyper-limitations."
"Scripting with the solution is good."
"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."
"I like the fact that JMeter integrates well with other tools."
"The reports and analysis tools are very good. They are the solution's most valuable features."
"The interface and the different types of API methods you can use are the most valuable aspects of this solution."
"We use it for REST API testing. Feature-wise, it is pretty lightweight. It is pretty fast, and we don't have to do a lot of things. We can just simply go and post our endpoint, and it gives different kinds of authorizations. We usually use authentication 2.0, which is the most common industry practice. So, it has the support for authorization through 2.0."
"No coding required."
"It is nice to have different workspaces. You have your personal workspace, and then you have a team workspace. In general, I like its UI. It is quite cool."
"Postman allows you to incorporate and export the test cases we create. It enables me to share the test cases with my colleagues, so I don't have to copy them into an Excel sheet. Postman lets me export the dataset and share it with my team. They can use my test case for their testing."
"The user-interface is very good."
"We can also submit requests multiple times and it allows us to capture the response each time by using utility scripts."
"The variables part is good. We can easily define the variables and we don't have to manually do a change every time, it gets automatically updated."
"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."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"It's not easy to get the data from one place or to do customizations."
"Currently, the integration pipeline is implemented by using Jenkins or a similar tool platform. These are continuous integration tools. As far as I know, integration is done by using custom scripts. It would be good if the integration with a continuous integration pipeline, like Jenkins or Hudson, can be done out of the box without using a script."
"Because so much is being done these days with authentication processes, a better system for either getting bearer tokens or some kind of token-based authentication prior to executing APIs would benefit the product. It is there, and you can do things. It is just not real clean at this point. There should be a better authentication process for JMeter or some automation or better guidelines for gaining and utilizing tokens on the fly."
"It has some proxy-based dependencies which require specific proxies to be set up or disabled, which causes problems."
"JMeter output reports can be difficult to understand without training."
"They can improve it a little bit in terms of distribution load testing. We struggled with it during the distribution. In terms of reporting, runtime monitoring is not currently included, and it should be included. They can also improve it on the reporting side in terms of the comparison of the reports. They can also focus more on integration with CI/CD. Currently, people are using their own customized tools. It would be nice if Apache can provide some standard tools and procedures for integration with CI/CD tools like DPR. There are some tools, but it would be nice if official standard tools and procedures are available."
"There needs to be more flexibility surrounding the testing of SOAP APIs."
"The request encryption could be one thing on which they can work a little bit. If we don't want to expose our production data but we still want to test our APIs on the production data, there should be a way to do that. It is not only with Postman. I think no tool in the market is doing that right now."
"Testing API is pretty straightforward in Postman, but it falls short when testing web services. For example, when we test web services, there is a visual component that we can import in SoapUI but not in Postman."
"Could be more user friendly."
"I have recently noticed that, for some reason, I am not able to import collections in JSON. It is weird because I was able to do it before. When you create a new collection and documentation, in tests, you usually have to click Save. If you don't click Save, your collections don't sync with other devices, which is something I don't like. It is not clear for the users in a shared workspace, and I usually forget to click Save and end up losing all the collections that I created. I create a lot of routes, and clicking Save all the time isn't efficient. Instead of clicking Save all the time, there should be an option to save everything in one go."
"An area that needs some improvement would be to allow multiple windows with different collections to be open at the same time."
"To get this email reporting function, we have to integrate Postman with Newman. If the two are not integrated, we won't be getting all these things in one group."
"The solution is quite complex partly because the UI needs simplification."
"I haven't looked into it. Most of our projects are nonprofit or grant-based. Everything is public commons, so we don't really have to worry about that so much."
"We are using the free version, and if required, we can easily switch to the other version."
"In terms of open-source adoption, it is completely free."
"I was using the free version of the software."
"When comparing the price with Load Runner, and if the cost is an issue then JMeter is a better choice"
"This is an open-source product."
"We are using the free version that is available."
"Its price is moderate as compared to other competitors. The version that we are using is not open source, so it is not free."
Apache JMeter may be used to test performance both on static and dynamic resources, Web dynamic applications. It can be used to simulate a heavy load on a server, group of servers, network or object to test its strength or to analyze overall performance under different load types.
Postman's Tools Support Every Stage of the API Lifecycle. Through design, testing and full production, Postman is there for faster, easier API development - without the chaos.
Apache JMeter is ranked 4th in API Testing Tools with 17 reviews while Postman is ranked 6th in API Testing Tools with 11 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.6, while Postman is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "Easy to learn, and free to use but could be more user-friendly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Postman writes "Easy to use with strong reporting features". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, ReadyAPI, Tricentis NeoLoad and Katalon Studio, whereas Postman is most compared with SoapUI Pro, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Apigee and Parasoft SOAtest. See our Apache JMeter vs. Postman 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.