Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Performance Tester comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache JMeter
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (1st), Load Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (1st)
IBM Rational Performance Te...
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Apache JMeter is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 20.0%, down 25.6% compared to last year.
IBM Rational Performance Tester, on the other hand, focuses on Test Management Tools, holds 1.4% mindshare, up 1.1% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Shashidhara Allalappa - PeerSpot reviewer
Extensive Protocol Support and Precise Reporting Elevate Testing, Though GUI Usability Needs Improvement
The GUI of Apache JMeter is not that user-friendly because we have many proxies, and we have to record through the proxy. With the limited SSL we have, we cannot use it for UI, which is a drawback. However, Apache JMeter is really good for REST APIs. I don't think there are any other areas other than the GUI that I would want improved about Apache JMeter; it is generally good and supports multiple protocols.
KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports web and mobile applications, very scalable, very stable, and wonderful support
There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is being able to launch many requests and scheduling simulating human interactions with the application."
"The most valuable feature of Apache JMeter is its popularity. It is the best open-source tool with all the features needed."
"It's stable and reliable."
"User-friendly and open source."
"The ease of use is the solution's most valuable feature. Also, the ability to easily create test cases is also very good. It's easy to just ramp up on the solution."
"We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"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."
"One valuable feature of Apache JMeter is the ability to replicate scenarios where bulk files have to be uploaded via API."
"It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
 

Cons

"The stability could be a bit better."
"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."
"In future releases, it would be helpful if there was an integration with ALM Octane."
"The initial setup is complex and needs to be upgraded."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the scripting concepts. The scripting and even the results and reports were very elaborative and informative in LoadRunner, but not in JMeter because everything has to be done manually."
"JMeter's reporting is extremely rudimentary. The fundamental reporting mechanisms need to be drastically improved. It doesn't utilize an automatic session management mechanism or methods other tools use like parsing cookies and variables. Everything needs to be done manually. There's no automation."
"The reports in Apache JMeter could improve."
"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"No licensing is required as it is a free, open-source tool."
"Apache JMeter is a free tool."
"We didn't pay licensing fees for Apache JMeter because it's an open-source tool. We only paid for the machines where we installed Apache JMeter modules."
"It is free."
"I switched to Apache because it is free. Other tools are much too expensive and can cost up to $50,000 a year if you are looking at commercial options."
"This is an open-source product."
"It is open source. There are no licensing costs associated. If you need enterprise support, you'll probably end up paying for a license. You would also factor in the infrastructure cost, but that's not significant."
"Apache JMeter is far less expensive than HP Performance Center."
"It is much cheaper than Micro Focus LoadRunner. We need perpetual licenses. Support is included in the first sale. After that, you need to renew support every year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
861,481 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
14%
Real Estate/Law Firm
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Postman compare with Apache JMeter?
Postman lets you easily define variables, which then get updated automatically. This is a huge time-saver and makes processes very efficient. We can also export the test cases we create and share t...
How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?
Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and performance testing, enabling users to monitor and test public and private APIs. We ...
What do you like most about Apache JMeter?
I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter
Rational Performance Tester
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AOL, Orbitz, Innopath Software, PrepMe, Sapient, Corporate Express Australia, CSIRO, Ephibian, Talis, DATACOM, ALALOOP, eFusion, Panter, Sourcepole, University of Western Cape
andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: July 2025.
861,481 professionals have used our research since 2012.