ACCELQ vs. Apache JMeter

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ACCELQ
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
ACCELQ is an agile quality management platform that helps users achieve continuous delivery for web, mobile, manual testing, and APIs. It can be used to write and manage manual test cases for the functionality that may be too fluid for automation.N/A
JMeter
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
JMeter, from Apache, is a load and performance testing tool.
$0
Pricing
ACCELQApache JMeter
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ACCELQJMeter
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ACCELQApache JMeter
Features
ACCELQApache JMeter
Automation Testing
Comparison of Automation Testing features of Product A and Product B
ACCELQ
8.9
1 Ratings
6% above category average
Apache JMeter
-
Ratings
Record and Automate9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Multi-Browser Testing8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Mobile Testing8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Test Scheduling10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Test Management8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
CI/CD Tool Integration8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated Version Control10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Parallel Testing10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Object Recognition10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Data-Driven Testing9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Testing Collaboration7.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Real Device Testing10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Testing Reports & Analytics9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
ACCELQ
-
Ratings
Apache JMeter
7.2
24 Ratings
17% below category average
End to end performance management00 Ratings9.021 Ratings
Integrated performance data00 Ratings8.522 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility00 Ratings7.521 Ratings
Real time monitoring00 Ratings6.521 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection00 Ratings4.417 Ratings
Best Alternatives
ACCELQApache JMeter
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.4 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ACCELQApache JMeter
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(2 ratings)
8.5
(39 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(12 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
6.5
(3 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
1.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Online Training
-
(0 ratings)
1.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
ACCELQApache JMeter
Likelihood to Recommend
ACCELQ
Low code test automation, Ready to pickup platform without having much prior knowledge on automation, AI agent interactions are nearly close to real life scenarios, best API automation scale it has got, QGPT logic builder has really changed the talk with DBs in AI way, Logic insights feature is really impressive to identify possible risk while just started developing web apps.
Read full review
Apache
JMeter is well suited for Java applications where the user can script the scenario once and make changes to accommodate for as many numbers of users for load test execution. The image and selection of any files or exporting files scenario is handled well.
It is less appropriate to test Ajax applications where it is required to script click per use.
Read full review
Pros
ACCELQ
  • Scriptless and hence coding is easy.
  • Maintenance of the scripts are easy.
  • Learning curve is small.
Read full review
Apache
  • Easy of use - in generate load like HTTP requests, and processing/analyzing the responses. No coding is necessary at the basic level, just need to understand load testing and the infrastructure being tested.
  • Automatic management of things like cookies to help with session state support - so you don't specifically have to worry about it or handle it
  • Lots of testing/configuration options to suit your needs in making the right load generation (sampling requests), and analyzing the results, including any pre and post processing of the results first. Things like the Beanshell/BSF pre/post processors, response assertion, regular expression extractor, XPath extractor, CSV data set config
  • There is a JMeter cloud service called BlazeMeter that I think would be useful for those that need to scale up high load without provisioning their own systems. I've not personally tried it though, but I recently attended a meetup presentation that highlighted nice useful features that BlazeMeter provides. One should evaluate the service if they are considering JMeter and need to expand beyond existing hardware resources.
Read full review
Cons
ACCELQ
  • Visual regression features
  • Test generation from UI and UX platforms like Figma
  • Manual test tools can be more integrated with AutoPilot
Read full review
Apache
  • Jmeter requires many tweaks with respect to its configuration file and thread properties. users need to edit theses files themselves. There could be some interface where we can edit this fields.
  • Jmeter cannot handle more threads and hangs up when we increase the number of threads. This causes lot of inconvenience. In these situations, user can be notified that such change would be lead to slow performance so that user can do as required. The same appears when we try to view huge files on graph listener.
  • Jmeter should optimize the read and write access to output csv since it acts as overhead to the I/O performance. This affects our test results for the application which we are testing.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
ACCELQ
No answers on this topic
Apache
Price, Wiki and user sharing. Having access to the information provided by the developers and other open source providers is key for me. The ability to share information and get answers directly is very important to success in software testing. And the price of this product currently is amazing. Too many companies charge way too much money for products that are far behind in their value and pertinence
Read full review
Usability
ACCELQ
Features like low code, API automation, auto pilot and free account creations, case studies are better suited for my business into IOT space, some of the enterprise automation features are truly game changer in productivity for my team. Database migration was supported seamlessly while opted for ACCELQ solutions.
Read full review
Apache
The purpose related to performance and load testing through Apache JMeter works fine but the usability of the tool should be improved quite a lot. If someone starts with the Jmeter fresh without prior experience, they need to put more efforts in understanding the tool. The UI is not that great which is the main reason not to give high rating on usability.
Read full review
Support Rating
ACCELQ
No answers on this topic
Apache
I have been using JMeter for the last year. By using this tool, you can make sure the system will work under varied loads. It helps us to simulate real time scenarios by creating required virtual users and make sure the application will work under load. Perform load, stress, and stability testing using JMeter.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
ACCELQ
When we implemented ACCELQ, we conducted POCs with many similar solutions. Among the tools we pursued at that time, accelQ stood out against Tricentis Tosca and QMetry automation studio. However, subject 7 did better. However, they were still in the nascent stages of building the tool, and hence we did not pick it.
Read full review
Apache
I have used LoadRunner and Silkperformer, and so far Jmeter turns out be the easiest to use of all these. While each of them have their own ROI, Jmeter can be picked by anyone in hours and start testing within a day. While with other tools, we need to get license, install them (takes a while) and setup tests and firewalls, etc.
Read full review
Return on Investment
ACCELQ
  • Overall adoption of an automation tool went up.
  • Migration of existing selenium scripts to ACCELQ was relatively easy and less effort.
  • Lack of overall admin console and hence managing the agents across different execution is difficult.
  • Integration between accelQ and any test management tool can be difficult and buggy in most cases, even though it can be coded.
Read full review
Apache
  • Good ROI on improving the performance of the application.
  • Finding issues in the performance.
  • Benchmark the performance results.
  • CON: Need skillset to create and maintain the scripts in Java.
  • Scripts are reusable and it is executed by any user.
  • Need Client and Server setup to execute the scripts.
Read full review
ScreenShots