We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The reporting features are really good. There's a lot less latency than other solutions."
"It is open source as well as relatively extendable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features. Its deployment is also very easy."
"It is scalable. You can scale up to 1,000 users in JMeter. If you can put up four slave servers, you can easily ramp up to 1,000 users."
"Apache JMeter is quite flexible."
"This solution is easier to use than any other tool in the market; there is not even a requirement to learn a lot of scripting in order to use it."
"It gives accurate results and recommendations that we can implement to enhance the performance of websites."
"We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"The scripting ability is most valuable. It is easy to use. There is a UI, and you can go in there and figure those things out. After you've got a good set of tests, you basically have a scripted document that you can grab and execute in a pipeline. It is pretty quick to set up, and you can scale it and version control it."
"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."
"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."
"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
"It is a stable solution."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"Until now, JMeter is not supporting most of the protocols."
"The memory utilization in JMeter is very poor."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"If JMeter could provide a web version of editing, that would be good."
"The UI of the solution needs to be better. The UI takes up a lot of our bandwidth."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
Apache JMeter is ranked 3rd in API Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 4th in API Testing Tools with 89 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. 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 OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API 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.