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

Apache JMeter vs Selenium HQ 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
6.6
Selenium HQ reduces testing time, increases ROI, and offers cost-efficient automation, despite needing skilled users for optimal performance.
With Apache JMeter, I have gained great statistics for performance and server metrics.
 

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
6.0
Selenium HQ's open-source model means no official support, but extensive community resources offer effective help for troubleshooting.
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.
The marketplace community and forums are what we browse and look after, and we have found solutions whenever we tried to find anything.
I have not had the need to escalate questions to Selenium HQ tech support recently, as open community support is widely available and has been sufficient for our needs.
 

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
7.4
Selenium HQ is scalable and efficient for large scenarios, though hardware and configuration can impact performance.
This restricts the number of users and necessitates increasing load agents or distributing the script across multiple machines.
JMeter is highly scalable, easily handling increased loads through the use of multiple servers.
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.
We can execute thousands of test cases weekly, and our automation coverage using Selenium HQ is approximately eighty-five percent.
 

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
7.0
Selenium HQ is stable across platforms, with minor issues in Internet Explorer; most find Chrome and Firefox satisfactory.
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.
Selenium HQ is a scalable solution; it has been in production for the last two years, but I have been working on it for the last six years, so it is definitely scalable.
 

Room For Improvement

Apache JMeter needs UI, reporting, and automation improvements to handle complex scenarios, large loads, and enhance overall usability.
Selenium HQ requires better browser support, enhanced reporting, frequent updates, mobile testing, improved documentation, and user-friendly features.
Enabling the conversion of scripts from commercial tools like LoadRunner or NeoLoad into JMeter scripts would also be advantageous.
With BlazeMeter, you can view the results in real-time.
Apache JMeter is really good for REST APIs.
An automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.
I don't know if we have that capability to provide different data sources such as SQL Server, CSV, or maybe some other databases, so that kind of capability would be great.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise users prefer Apache JMeter for its cost-effectiveness and flexibility in performance testing without licensing fees.
Selenium HQ is a cost-effective, open-source tool, though additional expenses may arise for maintenance, implementation, and expertise.
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.
Apache JMeter is completely free as it is open-source.
It's a cost-effective solution.
 

Valuable Features

Apache JMeter is praised for its user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, plugin support, and integration capabilities in performance testing.
Selenium HQ provides cost-free, adaptable, cross-platform testing with customization, CI tool compatibility, and a supportive community.
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.
We can add a large number of listeners that are freely available, and the multiple thread groups allow us to mimic real-time production scenarios with virtual users.
Selenium HQ supports multiple browsers via grid hosting and offers dynamic configuration setup for testing across Chrome, Edge, and Internet Explorer.
When we were doing these tests manually, it took several hours of effort, and those hours, when counted on the basis of person days, used to be maybe six or seven months of effort, which we can now do every day by running the pipeline.
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache JMeter
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (1st), Load Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (1st)
Selenium HQ
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (6th), Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Apache JMeter is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 19.1%, down 25.8% compared to last year.
Selenium HQ, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 3.5% mindshare, down 4.8% since last year.
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.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

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 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 do you like most about Apache JMeter?
I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing.
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
I will give an eight for my satisfaction with the pricing and licensing costs of Selenium HQ.
 

Also Known As

JMeter
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AOL, Orbitz, Innopath Software, PrepMe, Sapient, Corporate Express Australia, CSIRO, Ephibian, Talis, DATACOM, ALALOOP, eFusion, Panter, Sourcepole, University of Western Cape
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: August 2025.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.