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

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs Tricentis Tosca 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.7
Apache JMeter offers scalable, cost-effective performance testing, integrating well with CICD and outperforming HP Performance Center in returns.
Sentiment score
7.3
LoadRunner Professional offers strong ROI with reduced downtime, improved performance, and cost savings, justifying its initial investment.
Sentiment score
6.9
Tricentis Tosca offers high ROI by reducing test times and labor, with full CI integration enhancing productivity and market speed.
With Apache JMeter, I have gained great statistics for performance and server metrics.
Tasks that typically take ten hours are reduced to two to three hours, representing a threefold productivity gain.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
Apache JMeter relies on community support, praised for efficiency but lacking the dedicated assistance of commercial tools.
Sentiment score
6.1
OpenText LoadRunner Professional support varies, with mixed feedback on responsiveness; community forums are often used for assistance.
Sentiment score
6.8
Tricentis Tosca's support is praised for expertise and speed, but users note response delays and reliance on generic answers.
The support for Apache JMeter is excellent.
Apache JMeter has strong support through its vast Java-based community on platforms like Stack Overflow.
Apache JMeter relies more on community support.
If I need to rate support from one to ten, I would say it is a nine.
My experience has been positive; their response to emails or phone calls in tech support is fast, usually between eight to ten hours.
Response through chat has been replaced by chatbots, which has impacted the experience.
There is no way to mark the importance or criticality of incidents when creating them.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
Apache JMeter is scalable for large loads, but requires careful configuration and infrastructure, especially for enterprise-level setups.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText LoadRunner Professional provides scalable testing with high user counts, diverse protocols, but may require careful consideration of resource needs.
Sentiment score
7.3
Tricentis Tosca is highly scalable, supporting enterprise environments with robust automation, despite integration challenges and licensing considerations.
JMeter is highly scalable, easily handling increased loads through the use of multiple servers.
This restricts the number of users and necessitates increasing load agents or distributing the script across multiple machines.
For backend automation and performance testing with web services, web APIs, and queue management systems, I would rate Apache JMeter's scalability as between eight and nine.
It covers a breadth of applications and products, demonstrating excellent scalability that I have seen in reality.
Scalability is excellent with Tricentis Tosca.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Apache JMeter is stable but may face memory issues under high loads; effective in non-GUI mode with proper management.
Sentiment score
7.7
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering is highly stable and reliable, preferred over other tools despite minor bugs.
Sentiment score
7.4
Tricentis Tosca is generally stable, with occasional issues like connection drops, licensing complexity, and performance in large projects.
JMeter performs exceptionally well, especially in non-GUI mode, which supports high loads efficiently.
Several necessary features still need improvements, specifically in terms of reports and additional functionalities compared to other commercial tools.
For performance and stability, Tricentis Tosca deserves a 10 out of 10.
The stability of Tricentis Tosca is rated ten out of ten. It is very stable.
I find stability issues when using the Vision AI feature; Tricentis Tosca is not very stable.
 

Room For Improvement

Apache JMeter needs UI, reporting, and automation improvements to handle complex scenarios, large loads, and enhance overall usability.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is expensive and complex, needing simplification, better integration, automation, and enhanced reporting features.
Tricentis Tosca struggles with high costs, steep learning curve, limited features, and integration issues, impacting user experience significantly.
Currently, we need to use multiple separate JMeter instances to simulate reductions in load, which isn't ideal.
The tool needs improvements related to client-side metrics, integrating with tools like YSlow or HTTP Watch, and enhancing mobile testing capabilities.
With BlazeMeter, you can view the results in real-time.
I find that AI functionality in OpenText LoadRunner Professional should be improved and more accessible.
Moving to a cloud-based application rather than a desktop one could improve Tosca.
The Vision AI implementation works very slowly, affecting the speed of our work.
If a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise users prefer Apache JMeter for its cost-effectiveness and flexibility in performance testing without licensing fees.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers flexible scaling and support but may be costly compared to competitors due to additional user fees.
Tricentis Tosca's high cost suits large enterprises, offering comprehensive automation features that justify its expense over cheaper alternatives.
Using JMeter helps us avoid additional costs for high-load testing since it is open-source and allows for unlimited virtual users at no extra cost.
It's a cost-effective solution.
Apache JMeter is completely free as it is open-source.
The pricing for Tricentis Tosca is extremely high, and I rate it as ten in terms of expense.
A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros.
For enterprise customers, the cost is manageable because it provides solutions for multiple applications they want to automate.
 

Valuable Features

Apache JMeter is praised for its user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, plugin support, and integration capabilities in performance testing.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers robust scripting, analytics, diverse protocol support, and advanced scaling for efficient performance testing.
Tricentis Tosca offers scriptless, model-based test automation, supporting diverse technologies with ease, efficiency, and robust user experience.
JMeter facilitates scripting capabilities, which include options for Groovy scripts.
It's useful for both the person conducting the test and the higher management, like project managers or senior executives, who may not know about the test.
Despite being open source, it offers features comparable to paid tools.
The most valuable feature of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is the analysis part that is really good, along with the support for multiple protocols.
It allows for drag-and-drop functionality and demo automation in SAP-based applications, which can be challenging with other automation tools.
The most useful features of Tricentis Tosca include API scanning, basic web application automation, and data validation capabilities.
The modular approach reduces scripting effort by at least fifty percent, which significantly cuts down on the script development time.
 

Mindshare comparison

Performance Testing Tools
Performance Testing Tools
Functional Testing 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.
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
PrabhuKrishnamoorthy - PeerSpot reviewer
Has transformed testing by reducing scripting effort and enhancing productivity with advanced features
The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic. For example, if a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly. Improvements are needed to ensure it responds dynamically to changes in the application.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
6%
 

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 p...
How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?
Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and perfo...
What do you like most about Apache JMeter?
I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing.
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which help...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I would like to improve OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on what we discussed in our last discussion, as those ...
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is...
What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?
For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.
 

Also Known As

JMeter
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AOL, Orbitz, Innopath Software, PrepMe, Sapient, Corporate Express Australia, CSIRO, Ephibian, Talis, DATACOM, ALALOOP, eFusion, Panter, Sourcepole, University of Western Cape
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.