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

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Silk Performer 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
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (4th)
OpenText Silk Performer
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
22nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Apache JMeter is 9.2%, down from 20.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Performer is 1.5%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache JMeter9.2%
OpenText Silk Performer1.5%
Other89.3%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RR
Principal Performance Architect at Tecnotree Corporation
Have built custom performance test scripts and integrated them into automated pipelines seamlessly
Apache JMeter has its own pros and cons when compared to other tools. It is easy to use the tool and it has open-source capability so we can build our custom scripts and execute them. It provides other capabilities, such as integrating a database and connecting to other application servers for monitoring and related functions. We use dynamic HTML reporting, which helps us in testing analysis by pinpointing the bottlenecks based on the reports. We can identify the specific areas that need attention, troubleshoot them, and report to the development team. The user-friendly GUI for creating and managing tests makes it very easy to drag and drop samplers. For example, if you want the HTTP sampler, you can drag and drop it and use it. For configurations, we have other samplers. For results, we have the view results samplers that we can also drag and drop. The UI is good in comparison with other tools. Regarding integration with CI/CD pipelines, we can create Apache JMeter scripts and use the Docker image. From the image, whatever scripting we have done can be connected. We can use the CI/CD pipelines and connect them with Jenkins tools and GitHub. Then we can create the pipelines and automate the end-to-end flow. For connecting Jenkins to Apache JMeter, JMeter plugins are available, and we have used them. Apache JMeter also has some third-party plugins, which are not native samplers. If we want to use custom test executions, we definitely use all the different plugins available in Apache JMeter. The capability to simulate users has impacted testing resources and outcomes as Apache JMeter is based on Java, which has a limit to the users in a particular load generator. Apache JMeter provides distributed load testing where you can connect multiple PCs in a master and slave concept, allowing you to pump the load with any number of users. In the past, I have done load testing with 10,000 users by connecting the Apache JMeter distributed network in BlazeMeter. There is a cloud version available, the updated BlazeMeter, and I used that. It is very easy to launch load generators in BlazeMeter, and then we can run the test, scaling up beyond 10,000 users.
SR
Principal Software Architect at OpenText
Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy
In terms of areas of improvement, I would say the Silk Performance Explorer tool, which is used for monitoring and analysis, can be improved because that's where we spend most of our time when we're analyzing the test data. Any enhancements that can be provided in the monitoring sphere would be useful. When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test. The interface for the scripting could be more feature-rich. Integration with tools like Prometheus or Grafana where we can visualize the data would be great. As things stand, we have to use one monitoring tool to visualize data and another for visualizing the test metrics. Integration would enable us to see the metrics from Silk and correlate that with the metrics from other servers or other processes we're monitoring. It would save having to look at Silk data and server metrics separately. It's the way things are going with newer tools. I think the solution is being phased out by Micro Focus and their emphasis is focused more on LoadRunner. We haven't seen much development in the last few years.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's a free tool."
"They found that JMeter has more capabilities and specificity than the tools they were using."
"The most valuable features of Apache JMeter include SCTP sampler, throughput controllers, stepping up thread group, parallel controller, timers, and the ability to use gRPC protocol."
"I definitely recommend Apache JMeter to other users because it is an open-source tool; compared to LoadRunner, you save a significant amount of money, installation is hassle-free, and there are no additional components compared to other tools."
"The most valuable feature in JMeter is the Thread Group, which helps us to see whether the performance is good."
"Apache JMeter is well-known and widely used among developers, particularly on popular developer forums. While it may not have the most user-friendly interface, it offers strong support through official manuals and various articles from companies providing load testing services. The tool is free, has a substantial community, and serves as a fundamental choice for testers, especially those new to performance testing. While other tools like K6 may be more developer-oriented, JMeter's affordability and accessibility make it suitable for those without extensive performance testing experience."
"Our primary use case for the solution is comprehensive performance testing."
"I like the ease of using JMeter, as it can be downloaded and used to record and run load tests, and it can record, run and create reports easily without the need to have licenses, complex installations and paid support."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"We haven't used Silk on any project where it hasn't been able to support whatever we have needed."
 

Cons

"It's not stable. With every new release, they come up with newer features, which aren't always very stable."
"Some features still require a certain knowledge level to use effectively, and making these features more user-friendly would be beneficial."
"Improving JMeter's sync time would be beneficial."
"Apache JMeter may have difficulty recognizing dynamic objects in some critical cases, which can lead to challenges in terms of object identification."
"There is some work to be done with the integration."
"Running JMeter in GUI mode uses a lot of memory, which means we need to switch to a non-GUI mode when using a heavy load."
"At times when we overload the application, it gets stuck...After the solution gets stuck due to overloading, we have to restart our computers. In short, the solution keeps crashing."
"The reporting is not very good."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
"When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is free."
"The price of Apache JMeter is good. The selling rate is quite effective and the limited users with a multi-region-related execution."
"We use the open source version."
"Free"
"The tool is open-source."
"There are operational costs related to using Amazon Cloud, but the tool itself."
"JMeter is open source, so there are no licensing costs associated with it."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
902,417 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise61
No data available
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache JMeter?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the cost and license are free because Apache JMeter is open source.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter
Micro Focus Silk Performer, Silk Performer
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AOL, Orbitz, Innopath Software, PrepMe, Sapient, Corporate Express Australia, CSIRO, Ephibian, Talis, DATACOM, ALALOOP, eFusion, Panter, Sourcepole, University of Western Cape
University of Colorado, Medidata, Monash University
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools. Updated: June 2026.
902,417 professionals have used our research since 2012.