No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.
Apache JMeter Logo

Top 10 Apache JMeter Alternatives

Vendor: Apache
3.9 out of 5
Badge Ranked 1
Leave a review

Top Apache JMeter Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Apache JMeter based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Tricentis Tosca, Apigee, and OpenText Functional Testing. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. Apache JMeter surpasses its competitors by offering a robust suite for performance testing, including support for multiple protocols, advanced scripting capabilities, and a user-friendly interface, ensuring comprehensive load testing and accurate analysis for developers and testers.

Apache Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Apache, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Apache JMeter Logo
Tricentis Tosca
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Tricentis Tosca
4.1 out of 5
Tricentis Tosca excels in reusable data classes and scriptless testing while being critiqued for licensing costs. In comparison, Apache JMeter offers lightweight setup and wide protocol support without licensing fees, appealing for budget-conscious projects needing robust performance testing.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Tricentis Tosca Report
Tricentis Tosca involves a higher setup cost compared to the cost-effective Apache JMeter solution, offering a stark contrast in initial investment for users.
View comparison
Pricing
Tricentis Tosca involves a higher setup cost compared to the cost-effective Apache JMeter solution, offering a stark contrast in initial investment for users.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apigee
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Apigee
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter is appreciated for being open-source, free, and compatible with numerous protocols. In comparison, Apigee is valued for advanced API management features like analytics and security. Apache JMeter offers simple deployment, while Apigee provides strong support and documentation, despite higher costs.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Apigee Report
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, making it an affordable choice for many users, while Apigee involves a higher setup investment, reflecting its advanced features and capabilities. This distinct pricing structure addresses different user requirements.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, making it an affordable choice for many users, while Apigee involves a higher setup investment, reflecting its advanced features and capabilities. This distinct pricing structure addresses different user requirements.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
OpenText Functional Testing
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Functional Testing stands out for extensive application support and integration capabilities, ideal for enterprises seeking comprehensive automation. In comparison, Apache JMeter offers cost-effective, open-source load testing with extensive plugin support, appealing to organizations focused on performance testing without additional costs.
Download Apache JMeter vs. OpenText Functional Testing Report
OpenText Functional Testing often involves higher setup costs compared to Apache JMeter, which is known for its free and open-source nature.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Functional Testing often involves higher setup costs compared to Apache JMeter, which is known for its free and open-source nature.
Apache JMeter Logo
Katalon Studio
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Katalon Studio
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter excels in performance testing and flexibility, but its scripting complexity and configuration needs can be challenging. In comparison, Katalon Studio offers comprehensive automation testing features, easier deployment, and superior customer support, making it a strong contender despite higher costs. Users seeking robust performance testing might prefer JMeter, while those looking for ease of use and advanced features may choose Katalon Studio for better overall user satisfaction.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Katalon Studio Report
Apache JMeter has no initial setup cost, making it cost-effective, while Katalon Studio offers a more user-friendly interface with a higher setup cost.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter has no initial setup cost, making it cost-effective, while Katalon Studio offers a more user-friendly interface with a higher setup cost.
Apache JMeter Logo
Postman Enterprise
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Postman Enterprise
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter caters to advanced users needing extensive customization with flexible load testing capabilities. In comparison, Postman delivers simplicity, especially for API testing, through user-friendly features suitable for teams prioritizing ease of use and structured customer support.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Postman Enterprise Report
Apache JMeter has no setup costs, offering a cost-effective solution, whereas Postman Enterprise includes an initial setup fee, which increases the financial entry point.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter has no setup costs, offering a cost-effective solution, whereas Postman Enterprise includes an initial setup fee, which increases the financial entry point.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)
4.2 out of 5
OpenText LoadRunner Professional excels in handling complex performance testing with advanced capabilities, but faces challenges with cost and integration. In comparison, Apache JMeter, being open-source and cost-effective, appeals to varied users despite needing UI, scalability, and formal support improvements.
Download Apache JMeter vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Report
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) involves a significant setup cost, whereas Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup. LoadRunner's setup complexity contrasts with JMeter's simplicity and open-source nature.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) involves a significant setup cost, whereas Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup. LoadRunner's setup complexity contrasts with JMeter's simplicity and open-source nature.
Apache JMeter Logo
Tricentis NeoLoad
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Tricentis NeoLoad
4.1 out of 5
Tricentis NeoLoad is used for performance, load, and stress testing on web applications, SAP GUI, APIs, and web services. It integrates with CI/CD pipelines, offering team collaboration, API support, and bandwidth simulation. Users appreciate its script efficiency and cost-effectiveness but cite needs for improved stability, protocol support, and customer service.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report
The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing.
Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives.
View comparison
Pricing
The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing.
Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives.
Apache JMeter Logo
BlazeMeter
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
BlazeMeter
4.1 out of 5
BlazeMeter is widely used for performance testing across web and mobile applications. It supports load, stress, and endurance testing in scalable environments, aiding teams in simulating real-world conditions. Users value its integration with tools like New Relic, JMeter script reuse, and robust reporting features. They suggest improving server speed, scalability, and documentation.
Download Apache JMeter vs. BlazeMeter Report
The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan.
The solution is free and open source.
View comparison
Pricing
The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan.
The solution is free and open source.
Apache JMeter Logo
Perfecto
4.2 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Perfecto
4.2 out of 5
Perfecto is ideal for organizations needing comprehensive device testing with strong Appium and Selenium integration. In comparison, Apache JMeter appeals to budget-conscious projects needing flexible scripting and open-source benefits. JMeter is cost-effective, while Perfecto offers robust cloud-based testing and extensive support.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Perfecto Report
Perfecto has a higher setup cost, reflecting its comprehensive test automation capabilities, while Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, catering to users with budget constraints and open-source benefits.
View comparison
Pricing
Perfecto has a higher setup cost, reflecting its comprehensive test automation capabilities, while Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, catering to users with budget constraints and open-source benefits.
Apache JMeter Logo
Worksoft Certify
4.2 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Worksoft Certify
4.2 out of 5
Both Worksoft Certify and Apache JMeter are robust tools in their respective domains for test automation and performance testing. Worksoft Certify is praised for strong automation and enterprise integration. In comparison, Apache JMeter excels in performance testing, setup ease, and protocol support, making them suitable for differing needs.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Worksoft Certify Report
Worksoft Certify has a higher setup cost compared to Apache JMeter, highlighting a significant pricing difference. Apache JMeter offers a more affordable initial investment, making it a more cost-effective choice.
View comparison
Pricing
Worksoft Certify has a higher setup cost compared to Apache JMeter, highlighting a significant pricing difference. Apache JMeter offers a more affordable initial investment, making it a more cost-effective choice.
Apache JMeter Logo
Parasoft SOAtest
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Parasoft SOAtest
4.1 out of 5
Parasoft SOAtest excels in protocol support, test automation, and reporting. In comparison, Apache JMeter stands out for scripting capabilities, load testing, and community backing. Apache JMeter has low initial costs, while Parasoft SOAtest delivers higher ROI for those valuing support and extensive features.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Parasoft SOAtest Report
Parasoft SOAtest has a higher setup cost, while Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, highlighting a significant contrast between the two solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Parasoft SOAtest has a higher setup cost, while Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, highlighting a significant contrast between the two solutions.
Apache JMeter Logo
UiPath Test Cloud
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
UiPath Test Cloud
4.0 out of 5

UiPath Test Cloud is utilized for regression testing in applications like banking and healthcare, automating processes to reduce manual efforts. Prominent features include integration, low-code capabilities, CI/CD compatibility, and simplified automation. Enhancements are needed in mobile automation, test manager, and reporting, addressing speed and pricing concerns.

Download Apache JMeter vs. UiPath Test Cloud Report
When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced.
I wasn't involved in the negotiations for the UiPath Test Suite, so I have no information on its pricing.
View comparison
Pricing
When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced.
I wasn't involved in the negotiations for the UiPath Test Suite, so I have no information on its pricing.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter is an open-source option valued for cost-effectiveness and flexibility in diverse deployment environments. In comparison, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers advanced scalability and dedicated support services with its paid model, suitable for enterprises requiring extensive performance testing capabilities.
Download Apache JMeter vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) Report
Apache JMeter has a lower initial setup cost, appealing for budget-conscious users, while OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) may involve higher initial costs due to its advanced features and scalability.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter has a lower initial setup cost, appealing for budget-conscious users, while OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) may involve higher initial costs due to its advanced features and scalability.
Apache JMeter Logo
ReadyAPI Test
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
ReadyAPI Test
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter is known for its extensive protocol support and scripting flexibility, making it a strong choice for handling high loads efficiently. In comparison, ReadyAPI Test offers a comprehensive integrated environment and robust API testing capabilities, appealing to those seeking ease of use and powerful debugging features.
Download Apache JMeter vs. ReadyAPI Test Report
Apache JMeter has no setup cost as it is an open-source tool, while ReadyAPI Test requires a license, making it a more upfront investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter has no setup cost as it is an open-source tool, while ReadyAPI Test requires a license, making it a more upfront investment.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)
4.2 out of 5
LoadRunner Enterprise offers advanced features and comprehensive protocol support for enterprise needs. In comparison, Apache JMeter provides a budget-friendly solution due to its open-source nature, though scalability might require additional investment. LoadRunner appeals to enterprises, while JMeter suits smaller projects or limited budgets.
Download Apache JMeter vs. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Report
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) involves a higher setup cost, while Apache JMeter is known for its minimal initial cost, highlighting a significant difference in price structure between the two solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) involves a higher setup cost, while Apache JMeter is known for its minimal initial cost, highlighting a significant difference in price structure between the two solutions.
Apache JMeter Logo
ReadyAPI
3.9 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
ReadyAPI
3.9 out of 5
Apache JMeter is ideal for those seeking a cost-effective, flexible tool for performance testing with diverse protocol support. In comparison, ReadyAPI offers a user-friendly solution for API testing with strong integration capabilities. Tech buyers might choose each based on specific project needs and budget considerations.
Download Apache JMeter vs. ReadyAPI Report
Apache JMeter incurs no setup cost, making it ideal for budget-conscious users, while ReadyAPI involves a significant setup cost, reflecting its enhanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter incurs no setup cost, making it ideal for budget-conscious users, while ReadyAPI involves a significant setup cost, reflecting its enhanced features.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
Telerik Test Studio
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter is open-source and excels in load testing and customization, appealing to those prioritizing cost efficiency. In comparison, Telerik Test Studio offers robust automation and seamless integration with comprehensive support, attracting users who value intuitive setups despite a higher price tag.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Telerik Test Studio Report
Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup option, while Telerik Test Studio involves higher initial expenses. Users seeking budget-friendly solutions may lean towards Apache JMeter, contrasting with Telerik Test Studio's more premium pricing approach.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup option, while Telerik Test Studio involves higher initial expenses. Users seeking budget-friendly solutions may lean towards Apache JMeter, contrasting with Telerik Test Studio's more premium pricing approach.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
Oracle Application Testing Suite
3.9 out of 5
Oracle Application Testing Suite offers seamless Oracle integration and robust automation. In comparison, Apache JMeter provides open-source flexibility with wide platform compatibility, making it ideal for budget-conscious testing. Both serve different testing needs with unique strengths and deployment options.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite Report
Oracle Application Testing Suite involves a higher setup cost compared to Apache JMeter, which is often favored for its minimal initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Oracle Application Testing Suite involves a higher setup cost compared to Apache JMeter, which is often favored for its minimal initial investment.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
Appvance AIQ Platform
4.0 out of 5
Appvance AIQ Platform excels in automated testing providing seamless integration and robust test creation. Users appreciate its versatile use cases and advanced features for enhanced efficiency. Some reviews suggest room for improvement in the learning curve to increase ease of use for new team members.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
IBM Rational Test Workbench
3.8 out of 5
IBM Rational Test Workbench offers automated testing and seamless IBM integration, focusing on robustness. In comparison, Apache JMeter provides performance testing across various protocols and flexibility through open-source customizations. IBM's strong support contrasts JMeter's community-driven assistance and simpler deployment.
Download Apache JMeter vs. IBM Rational Test Workbench Report
IBM Rational Test Workbench has a higher setup cost compared to Apache JMeter's more economical initial setup.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Rational Test Workbench has a higher setup cost compared to Apache JMeter's more economical initial setup.
Apache JMeter Logo
k6 Open Source
3.8 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
k6 Open Source
3.8 out of 5
Apache JMeter offers robust data handling and extensive protocol support for users requiring complex scenarios. In comparison, k6 Open Source emphasizes efficiency with its modern scripting language and quick deployment, appealing to teams seeking simplicity and ease of cloud integration.
Download Apache JMeter vs. k6 Open Source Report
Apache JMeter involves no initial setup cost, making it budget-friendly, while k6 Open Source also offers a free-to-use model. JMeter's extensive plugin ecosystem stands out, whereas k6 prioritizes ease of use and modern reporting capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter involves no initial setup cost, making it budget-friendly, while k6 Open Source also offers a free-to-use model. JMeter's extensive plugin ecosystem stands out, whereas k6 prioritizes ease of use and modern reporting capabilities.
Apache JMeter Logo
Akamai CloudTest
3.8 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Akamai CloudTest
3.8 out of 5
Akamai CloudTest excels in scalability and analytics for large-scale testing. In comparison, Apache JMeter's open-source nature and plugin support offer extensive customization. Akamai CloudTest appeals to those seeking quick deployment, while Apache JMeter attracts those valuing flexibility and low-cost setup.
Download Akamai CloudTest vs. Apache JMeter Report
Akamai CloudTest involves a high setup cost with a complex pricing model, whereas Apache JMeter offers a minimal or no setup cost with open-source flexibility, highlighting a significant difference in initial investment requirements.
View comparison
Pricing
Akamai CloudTest involves a high setup cost with a complex pricing model, whereas Apache JMeter offers a minimal or no setup cost with open-source flexibility, highlighting a significant difference in initial investment requirements.
Apache JMeter Logo
RadView WebLOAD
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
RadView WebLOAD
4.1 out of 5
Apache JMeter provides versatile testing with extensive plugins, appealing to developers needing customization. In comparison, RadView WebLOAD offers superior integration with performance management tools, making it ideal for enterprises seeking detailed analysis and benefits from dedicated customer support and guided deployment.
Download Apache JMeter vs. RadView WebLOAD Report
Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup cost, focusing on open-source flexibility, while RadView WebLOAD requires a higher initial investment for its comprehensive enterprise-level features, highlighting a significant price difference in their setup costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup cost, focusing on open-source flexibility, while RadView WebLOAD requires a higher initial investment for its comprehensive enterprise-level features, highlighting a significant price difference in their setup costs.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
Eggplant Performance
3.9 out of 5
Apache JMeter, as an open-source tool, offers customization and flexibility in performance testing. In comparison, Eggplant Performance provides robust automation and better insights into metrics, appealing to tech buyers valuing sophisticated analysis despite higher costs.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Eggplant Performance Report
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost making it a budget-friendly option, while Eggplant Performance requires a higher initial investment reflecting its premium features.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost making it a budget-friendly option, while Eggplant Performance requires a higher initial investment reflecting its premium features.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
ReadyAPI Performance
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter's open-source model suits budget-conscious projects with extensive plugins and community support. In comparison, ReadyAPI Performance offers centralized automation and integration, justifying its licensing costs for enterprises needing structured deployment and formal support. Each serves different scalability and feature needs efficiently.
Download Apache JMeter vs. ReadyAPI Performance Report
Apache JMeter is free and open-source, offering a cost-effective setup, while ReadyAPI Performance requires a paid license, reflecting a more substantial initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter is free and open-source, offering a cost-effective setup, while ReadyAPI Performance requires a paid license, reflecting a more substantial initial investment.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
SmartBear LoadNinja
3.7 out of 5
Apache JMeter appeals with its open-source flexibility and low cost, making it ideal for technical teams with budget constraints. In comparison, SmartBear LoadNinja offers an easy-to-deploy cloud-based model and real-browser testing, suitable for enterprises seeking quick setup and comprehensive user interaction insights.
Download Apache JMeter vs. SmartBear LoadNinja Report
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost compared to SmartBear LoadNinja, while SmartBear LoadNinja provides a streamlined initial process for users despite the higher cost.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost compared to SmartBear LoadNinja, while SmartBear LoadNinja provides a streamlined initial process for users despite the higher cost.
Apache JMeter Logo
HCL OneTest
1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
HCL OneTest
1 out of 5
HCL OneTest supports comprehensive software testing, offering features like automated functional and performance testing. It integrates seamlessly across environments. Users appreciate its adaptability. Yet, enhancing compatibility with modern frameworks could further its appeal.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
Automai AppLoader
1 out of 5
Automai AppLoader effectively handles application load testing, supporting user journey replication and performance monitoring. It offers an intuitive scriptless design that boosts efficiency. Users note enhancement opportunities in reporting features, suggesting more customization options to better fit varied testing requirements.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
StresStimulus
4.0 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
StresStimulus
4.0 out of 5
JMeter excels in flexibility and cost-effectiveness through its open-source model and extensive plugins. In comparison, StresStimulus offers detailed reporting and integration capabilities. JMeter suits developers needing customization, while StresStimulus appeals to those valuing advanced features and comprehensive support.
Download Apache JMeter vs. StresStimulus Report
Apache JMeter offers a low-cost open-source setup, while StresStimulus provides a paid and more comprehensive solution.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a low-cost open-source setup, while StresStimulus provides a paid and more comprehensive solution.
Apache JMeter Logo
Tricentis Flood
3.5 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Tricentis Flood
3.5 out of 5
Apache JMeter is ideal for budget-conscious organizations with its open-source cost-effectiveness. In comparison, Tricentis Flood offers advanced features and cloud-based scalability, appealing to enterprises needing extensive testing capabilities. Apache JMeter provides flexibility, while Tricentis Flood ensures sophisticated testing and professional support.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Tricentis Flood Report
Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup with flexible open-source options, while Tricentis Flood provides a streamlined setup experience with an intuitive interface, highlighting significant differences in ease of use and initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a cost-effective setup with flexible open-source options, while Tricentis Flood provides a streamlined setup experience with an intuitive interface, highlighting significant differences in ease of use and initial investment.
Apache JMeter Logo
Ixia IxLoad
1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Ixia IxLoad
1 out of 5
Ixia IxLoad is used for testing networks and applications' performance and scalability with valuable features like real-time analytics and comprehensive protocol support. Some users suggest enhancement in resource management and test result visualization for a more efficient testing process.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
SoapUI
4.2 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
SoapUI
4.2 out of 5
Apache JMeter is appreciated for its cost-effectiveness and robust performance testing. In comparison, SoapUI stands out with a comprehensive feature set, justifying its higher price. Apache JMeter offers a high ROI with no initial cost, while SoapUI provides advanced capabilities for significant long-term value.
Download Apache JMeter vs. SoapUI Report
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, while SoapUI's setup cost is relatively higher due to additional features. SoapUI provides enhanced support and user-friendly interfaces compared to JMeter's more technical and cost-effective approach.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers a lower setup cost, while SoapUI's setup cost is relatively higher due to additional features. SoapUI provides enhanced support and user-friendly interfaces compared to JMeter's more technical and cost-effective approach.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing
4.5 out of 5
Apache JMeter offers cost-efficient testing with extensive protocols and plugins for complex scenarios. In comparison, Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing provides a flexible, real-browser testing environment with cloud scalability, ideal for those prioritizing ease of use and comprehensive support despite higher initial costs.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing Report
Apache JMeter offers no setup cost, making it highly cost-effective for businesses with technical expertise, while Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing involves setup fees, justified by its streamlined process and superior support for users seeking more guided implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers no setup cost, making it highly cost-effective for businesses with technical expertise, while Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing involves setup fees, justified by its streamlined process and superior support for users seeking more guided implementation.
Apache JMeter Logo
Cavisson NetStorm
4.7 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
Cavisson NetStorm
4.7 out of 5
Apache JMeter's open-source model makes it budget-friendly for organizations, with flexibility in custom test executions and easy CI/CD integration. In comparison, Cavisson NetStorm's detailed diagnostics and real-time monitoring justify its higher costs for enterprises needing advanced performance analytics and comprehensive support.
Download Apache JMeter vs. Cavisson NetStorm Report
Apache JMeter offers open-source setup flexibility, often resulting in lower initial costs, while Cavisson NetStorm's setup is more structured, potentially leading to higher initial expenses but with comprehensive support included. Pricing structures reflect their target usage scenarios.
View comparison
Pricing
Apache JMeter offers open-source setup flexibility, often resulting in lower initial costs, while Cavisson NetStorm's setup is more structured, potentially leading to higher initial expenses but with comprehensive support included. Pricing structures reflect their target usage scenarios.
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
OpenText Silk Performer
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Silk Performer enables effective load testing for applications, ensuring performance meets business needs. Features like cloud-based testing and extensive protocol support add value. However, users report room for improvement in ease of integration and licensing flexibility, suggesting the need for a more intuitive experience.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
UBIK Load Pack
1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
UBIK Load Pack
1 out of 5
UBIK Load Pack is used for performance testing with standout features like extensive protocol support and real-time analytics. Its intuitive design streamlines operations but could benefit from improved documentation. Users appreciate its customization capabilities and scalability, making it reliable for diverse requirements.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
API Fortress
1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
API Fortress
1 out of 5
API Fortress enables comprehensive API testing with automation capabilities and detailed analytics. Its valuable features include integration with CI/CD pipelines and customizable workflows. Users find the learning curve challenging and suggest improvements in documentation and onboarding processes. API Fortress facilitates enhanced API reliability and performance.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
XRebel
1 out of 5
Apache JMeter Logo
XRebel
1 out of 5
XRebel assists developers by offering real-time insights into application performance. Its valuable features include detailed request tracking and profiling, helping identify bottlenecks. Users suggest enhancing integration with diverse tools for an improved experience, broadening its applicability across various platforms.
View comparison
Apache JMeter Logo
Apache JMeter Logo
PFLB Platform, Performance and Load Testing
1 out of 5
PFLB Platform, Performance and Load Testing is ideal for companies needing detailed performance assessments. Users appreciate its robust capabilities and comprehensive reporting. Some mention room for improvement in documentation clarity. Efficient in handling heavy loads, it empowers teams to optimize and maintain application performance.
View comparison

Related categories

Performance Testing Tools
Load Testing Tools
API Testing Tools