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

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Test Workbench comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache JMeter
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in API Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (1st)
IBM Rational Test Workbench
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
18th
Ranking in API Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (34th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Apache JMeter is 24.7%, up from 22.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.5%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AlexLogan - PeerSpot reviewer
It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve
I rate JMeter five out of 10. You need knowledgeable employees to work with the tool because it's difficult to learn. There is a steep learning curve, so you shouldn't expect an entry-level engineer to pick up the tool quickly and become proficient. It takes a considerable amount of time.
reviewer1513668 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"The metrics part of it and the ability to write your custom code to do some specific tests in the performance testing space are the most valuable features."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"JMeter can be integrated with most open-source platforms like Grafana, Prometheus, or even with custom-made tools by extending it and integrating from GitHub."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free."
"It's a powerful tool that is open source."
"It's easy to set up."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
 

Cons

"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."
"In terms of setup, it could be nicer, to be honest. Sometimes, I get a little bit lost."
"The reporting section of the solution can be better."
"We would like more documentation to be provided for the advanced level features that are available in this solution, in order to improve development."
"One area for improvement is the ability to decrease load suddenly during tests. Currently, we need to use multiple separate JMeter instances to simulate reductions in load, which isn't ideal."
"Modeling a test is difficult. If you don't have much knowledge, you won't be able to do it easily. Testing APIs is also difficult."
"JMeter should be more stable. Every time there is a new release coming up, a lot of its older functionalities or the new functionalities that are brought in are not very well-documented. It should be documented properly, and there should be proper use cases."
"There is room for improvement in the scripting concepts. The scripting and even the results and reports were very elaborative and informative in LoadRunner, but not in JMeter because everything has to be done manually."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an open-source product."
"Since it's free, there's no need for extensive support or improvements in pricing."
"This is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs involved."
"When comparing the price with Load Runner, and if the cost is an issue then JMeter is a better choice"
"The main reason we chose Apache JMeter is that it is cost-effective and easy to use. There is no need to pay for additional services. Additionally, it does not require additional payment to vendors. The solution is open-source and free."
"Apache JMeter is a free tool."
"It is free."
"There are operational costs related to using Amazon Cloud, but the tool itself."
"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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 do you like most about Apache JMeter?
I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter
Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AOL, Orbitz, Innopath Software, PrepMe, Sapient, Corporate Express Australia, CSIRO, Ephibian, Talis, DATACOM, ALALOOP, eFusion, Panter, Sourcepole, University of Western Cape
Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache JMeter vs. IBM Rational Test Workbench and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.