We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and ReadyAPI 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."It's open source, so I like that about the product. And there's a lot of community support for it."
"We find the ease of use and the reports and graphs available valuable."
"API testing, Database Testing, and MQ testing can be done with ease."
"JMeter lets us generate virtual users and T-load, per our requirements. It's easy to configure and adjusting the virtual users according to the DPS we want to achieve."
"JMeter is user-friendly, and that's a notable advantage of JVTech. It's straightforward and easy to use, unlike some other load testing tools, making it very easy to understand."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"User-friendly and open source."
"We appreciate that the solution is free to use, as an open-source tool."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"For anyone who does not have experience with automation, ReadyAPI provides a sense of comfort, especially for testers who find it hard to go directly into coding."
"It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."
"One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration."
"The performance testing capabilities are very good."
"It's great for those that don't have as much exposure to programming."
"The feature that allows you to import an API collection or a project is valuable."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner we can go from the UI and we can configure it. There is no such feature in Apache JMeter. There should be UI-based recording history or logs."
"The memory utilization in JMeter is very poor."
"The solution could use some sort of educational features to offer tips and hints to help users navigate it better. They should improve the manuals and help files."
"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."
"Self-healing and page rendering for the end-users are not available in Apache JMeter."
"There is some work to be done with the integration."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"Version control does not work well."
"In terms of features, I have already raised different change requests on the ReadyAPI side. One of the largest functions I've requested is the validation of the payload for the REST APIs."
"ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time."
"The content on ReadyAPI in SmartBear Academy is outdated."
"The UI is not user-friendly."
"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."
"ReadyAPI could improve by adding a conversion tool from one file type to another. Import support for multiple file types would be beneficial."
"The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 7th in Performance Testing Tools with 34 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while ReadyAPI 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 ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test, SmartBear TestComplete and Parasoft SOAtest. See our Apache JMeter vs. ReadyAPI report.
See our list of best Performance 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.