We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and ReadyAPI Performance 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.
"JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process."
"The solution is free. You don't need to worry about licensing costs."
"To me, what's most valuable in Apache JMeter is that it's a lightweight tool for application testing. It's the best load-testing tool for my company because Apache JMeter simulates your application during testing. Apache JMeter also creates threads with good server utilization. Apache JMeter allows you to focus on analyzing the situation, looking into measurements, response time, and client-server responses, which I find valuable."
"We like that Apache JMeter has different features and different plugins and that they are free of charge."
"We are using it just for load testing. We are using its free version, and it is scalable."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jenkins and the reporting."
"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."
"It's open source, so I like that about the product. And there's a lot of community support for it."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"We find the product to be scalable."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
"We can scale."
"The memory utilization in JMeter is very poor."
"At present, if the number of virtual users increases beyond 10,000 when testing, then it results in a Java heap which causes the solution to crash."
"Automation is difficult in JMeter."
"The installation needs some work. It could be simplified."
"If the solution was GUI based, I believe that it would be more versatile."
"It should start supporting the presentation layer. It currently provides performance testing specifically at the application and API level. It can be extended to the presentation layer, which includes mainly Angular and React frameworks. It should also be easy to use and easy to train people."
"JMeter is lagging when it comes to GUI performance testing because we need to install some third-party plugins for recording the GUI script, and the performance isn't very reliable."
"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."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
"It is very slow sometimes."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while ReadyAPI Performance is ranked 10th in Performance Testing Tools with 7 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while ReadyAPI Performance is rated 8.2. 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 Performance writes "Straightforward to install with the ability to add multiple assertions but the price is too high". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas ReadyAPI Performance is most compared with SmartBear LoadNinja. See our Apache JMeter vs. ReadyAPI Performance 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.
