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

Apache JMeter vs OpenText UFT One comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024

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 is cost-effective, offering significant savings and effectiveness for high-demand performance testing, surpassing HP Performance Center.
Sentiment score
7.5
OpenText UFT One enhances efficiency and productivity with automation, AI capabilities, and supports achieving up to 300% ROI.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
Apache JMeter support is community-driven and free, with varying response times; commercial options like BlazeMeter offer dedicated assistance.
Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText UFT One's customer service is generally efficient but inconsistent, with varied experiences in support quality and response time.
The support for Apache JMeter is excellent.
Apache JMeter relies more on community support.
After creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
Apache JMeter scales well with distributed testing, enhanced by cloud tools, but faces challenges at high loads and configurations.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText UFT One is scalable, integrating with Jenkins, but success depends on licensing, automation quality, and deployment strategy.
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.
Without location dependency, it's rated ten out of ten, but with dependency, it can be six out of ten.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Apache JMeter is stable but may require specific configurations for high loads; community support exists for optimal performance.
Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText UFT One generally exhibits stability, though some users report performance issues, often resolved through updates. Satisfaction remains high.
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.
 

Room For Improvement

Apache JMeter faces criticism for its complex GUI, performance issues, limited automation, documentation, and integration challenges.
OpenText UFT One requires improvements in stability, compatibility, speed, memory use, object recognition, and integration with open-source tools.
Currently, we need to use multiple separate JMeter instances to simulate reductions in load, which isn't ideal.
Enabling the conversion of scripts from commercial tools like LoadRunner or NeoLoad into JMeter scripts would also be advantageous.
Automating report analysis and supporting customized SLAs for script report generation could also enhance functionality.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
 

Setup Cost

Apache JMeter is cost-effective and scalable, appealing to enterprises for its flexibility and extensive community support.
OpenText UFT One licensing is costly, leading organizations to mix different license types and evaluate ROI against open-source 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 or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
 

Valuable Features

Apache JMeter provides an open-source, scalable solution with extensive plugins, effective reporting, and strong community support for performance testing.
OpenText UFT One provides versatile automation with cross-platform compatibility, easy use, robust testing, and integration with key technologies.
Monetary benefits with Apache JMeter are notable since it doesn’t require a licensed version.
JMeter facilitates scripting capabilities, which include options for Groovy scripts.
Despite being open source, it offers features comparable to paid tools.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers.
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache JMeter
Ranking in API Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (1st), Load Testing Tools (1st)
OpenText UFT One
Ranking in API Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
95
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the API Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Apache JMeter is 6.4%, down from 14.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 12.2%, up from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Swetha Mahasivbhattu - PeerSpot reviewer
Cost-effective performance and useful insights with an easy setup
It is very user-friendly. We just upload the script, and the dashboards are very informative. 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. They can easily view the results and gain valuable insights. Additionally, monetary benefits with Apache JMeter are notable since it doesn’t require a licensed version.
Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results
With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
830,726 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
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
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 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 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 UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?
My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.
 

Also Known As

JMeter
Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
 

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
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache JMeter vs. OpenText UFT One and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
830,726 professionals have used our research since 2012.