Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
JMeter
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
JMeter, from Apache, is a load and performance testing tool.
$0
LoadRunner Professional
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
A solution simplifies performance load testing for colocated teams. With project-based capabilities, so teams can quickly identify abnormal application behavior.N/A
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
N/A
ReadyAPI (formerly SoapUI Pro, LoadUI Pro, and ServiceV Pro) is a REST and SOAP API functional testing tool that enables software developers, QA engineers, and manual testers to work together to create, maintain, and execute complex end-to-end API tests in their CI/CD pipelines without needing to code.N/A
Pricing
Apache JMeterOpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPI
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
JMeterLoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPI
Free Trial
NoNoYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesNoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache JMeterOpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPI
Considered Multiple Products
JMeter
Chose Apache JMeter
More threads supported, open-source, more reliable, and easy to work with. The User interface is very elegant and simple to use, as compared to other competitors.
Chose Apache JMeter
It is very costlier than Jmeter to manager for a multi-seat license. All company does not procure the license for costlier tools. Maintaining Load Runner scripts is difficult than JMeter scripts. You need skill resources to create and maintain the loadrunner scripts and tools. …
Chose Apache JMeter
It's very easy GUI helps the tester to perform various testing scenarios. Easy to configure test cases and modules which has proper and well-maintained documentation. Its an excellent tool for performance testing and running a variety of load tests, stress tests, and longevity …
Chose Apache JMeter
The main and best thing is that it's an open source tool with the biggest community worldwide.
Chose Apache JMeter
The recorder provided by JMeter is ok and if your team has no idea about programming you can use it to test your web apps without writing any code.
Chose Apache JMeter
It has very powerful capabilities and for free!!! It's ease of use and installation and easy to get started are highlights. A lot of community support and youtube videos from JMeter developers to help you understand various functionalities within JMeter to support you. You can …
Chose Apache JMeter
I have evaluated LOADUI (web free version) and it was a very unstable tool and I could not rely on those results completely as I was not sure how the tool was performing. It only generated the top 10 less transaction times and when Jmeter was in use, it was very effective in …
Chose Apache JMeter
LoadRunner and Silk Test were the tools I used in the past to compare with JMeter. I thought LoadRunner had a more commercial appearance and it comes with HP support from your service provider. It also comes at a steep price. JMeter and LoadRunner have a similar learning curve …
Chose Apache JMeter
It is best open source tool available in the market . Also it is easy to train resources and is also very useful for integration testing.
Chose Apache JMeter
We found BlazeMeter's service to fit great with our JMeter scripts, since they execute our JMeter scripts and provide excellent reporting tools and graphs, besides multi region and infrastructure to support different configurations of multiple concurrent users. I have used HP …
Chose Apache JMeter
No licensing issue. Many blogs provide the issue noticed and resolution for the same hence no need to pay heavy maintenance fees.
Chose Apache JMeter
Both tools are great, but JMeter allows for better performance/load testing, scalability, and is free.
LoadRunner Professional
Chose OpenText LoadRunner Professional
Micro Focus LoadRunner fit well into our portfolio of tools with its long track record, ability to test near any application technology we adopt and allow for a single / cohesive toolset to drive our performance testing needs.
Chose OpenText LoadRunner Professional
While soasta is currently being used for cloud related applications, LR is specifically used to address the load testing on on-premise servers in our case.
Chose OpenText LoadRunner Professional
Loadrunner stacks up very well against these tools. All software have certain very strong features and that is what differentiates LoadRunner from all of these. It has accurate results and data. Reports are also very well formatted. Different data can be integrated and other …
Chose OpenText LoadRunner Professional
The biggest point of using HP LoadRunner is the response time numbers captured after executing the tests were more accurate when we generated the same by using tools like JMeter or NeoLoad though it involves a certain licensing cost but what [we] needed was trust and accuracy …
Chose OpenText LoadRunner Professional
Most of the above tools are pretty popular in the industry. These are tools that are way cheaper compared to the industry giant LoadRunner. Yet these tools have their own limitations and drawbacks. In BlazeMeter the user load cannot be modified during the test run. JMeter and Bl…
Chose OpenText LoadRunner Professional
It was faster to script in HP LoadRunner than in JMeter. The main issue is the expense involved in the cost of the virtual users in HP LoadRunner. In time, it may be more cost effective to switch to JMeter when the number of virtual users increases.
ReadyAPI
Chose ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI stands out among all these tools except for the fact that it is a paid tool.
Chose ReadyAPI
Each product has a different specialty. With ReadyAPI, it combines multiple specialties into one product and also allows a combination of other products within the Smartbear suite. With other products integration of multiple test, products are far more difficult and require …
Chose ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI manages DataSources, Endpoints, and Environments much better than Postman. Postman is a little simpler implementation but has a Team Workspace that is powerful for Development handoffs and manual testing.
Chose ReadyAPI
It has many features including functional security testing. And it's known to be widely used.
Chose ReadyAPI
The main competitor for ReadyAPI was Postman. It is much more lightweight, but that means you also get fewer features.
ReadyAPI also provides an ecosystem in which you can have an entire lifecycle for your API, if that is what you want - and are willing to put in the work to …
Chose ReadyAPI
Great premium features. Community support. Support for groovy script for extending the existing SoapUI functionality. Load testing support.
Chose ReadyAPI
SoapUI is more complete in every way, it facilitates the user's work and allows managing all the SOAP and REST requests that are needed in a more organized way.
Chose ReadyAPI
SOAP UI provides a much better way to create load tests with a friendly UI, in comparison other frameworks which we found hard to learn and maintain the scripts
Chose ReadyAPI
I didn't select soapui. The company selected because the original team was most familiar with it. I prefer a tool, like REST assured, where I define the scope and depth of my automation. But it's got a value that can only be measure by your skill set, company culture, software …
Chose ReadyAPI
None of the alternatives are comparable with SoapUI. Perhaps JMeter is the only one that has most similarity.
The only advantage of these alternative is the price (all are free); But SoapUI also offers free versions as well that still can compete with all above products.
Chose ReadyAPI
HP Products, Silk, IBM Rational suite of testing tools.

They just seemed to be overkill or mostly under the needed features. Some have made way to complex, where SoapUI manage to continue to improve the tool, but maintain the ease of use.
Chose ReadyAPI
We primarily explored the possiblities of using JMeter or JUnit for web services testing. However JMeter comes nowhere close to soap UI in terms of simplicity and intuitiveness of the tool.
Features
Apache JMeterOpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPI
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
Apache JMeter
7.2
24 Ratings
17% below category average
OpenText LoadRunner Professional
8.4
6 Ratings
1% below category average
ReadyAPI
-
Ratings
End to end performance management9.021 Ratings9.06 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated performance data8.522 Ratings10.06 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility7.521 Ratings9.06 Ratings00 Ratings
Real time monitoring6.521 Ratings6.15 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection4.417 Ratings8.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache JMeterOpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPI
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Enterprises
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 8.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache JMeterOpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPI
Likelihood to Recommend
8.5
(39 ratings)
9.0
(7 ratings)
7.0
(65 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.6
(12 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(18 ratings)
Usability
6.5
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.9
(3 ratings)
Availability
1.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
3.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(6 ratings)
Online Training
1.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache JMeterOpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPI
Likelihood to Recommend
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
OpenText
Micro Focus LoadRunner and its suite of tools, specifically VuGen works wonderfully for us for all web, http/https and web service calls. We've been able to build tests for near any scenario we need with relative ease. As long as we have crafted up requirements for our scenarios / scripts to managed scope, we've had high success working with scripting and data driving. Our main tests are web service calls - typically chained together to form a full scenario with transactions measuring the journey or a similar (measure along the way) journey through a browser. For web services we will use VuGen and browser we've shifted to Tru Client I have had little-to-no experience scripting against a thick client where a ui-driven test would be required. I know its possible but quite costly due to the need to run the actual desktop client to drive tests. We've been fortunate enough to leverage http calls to represent client traffic.
Read full review
SmartBear
As stated, we do a LOT of API testing, the swaggerhub import makes it easy to add APIs. This is very well-suited, as well as easy management of the steps/cases/suites inside of ReadyAPI. The one thing I do wish ReadyAPI was better suited for is changes to data, we have a lot of test cases in ReadyAPI and if we make a change to how the backend data is structured, one-by-one adjustments need to be made to the steps. Less appropriate, UI testing.
Read full review
Pros
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
OpenText
  • It can simulate multiple users at the same time and help understand the performance.
  • It can generate excellent reports and give insights into application performance.
  • It is a fast tool and does not take time to perform its functions.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Ease of use (ability to automatically import API definitions, Jenkins integration for running in the pipeline).
  • Detailed test reports (allow to easily identify weak spots during both functional and performance testing).
  • One platform for all tests (allows to closely couple and reuse existent tests).
Read full review
Cons
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
OpenText
  • HP LoadRunner with new patches and releases sometimes makes no longer support older version of various protocols like Citrix, which makes the task time-consuming when using older versions of LoadRunner for some of the cases. So it should support older version as well while upgrading.
  • Configuring HP LoadRunner over the firewall involves lots of configuration and may be troublesome. So, there should be a script (power shell script for Windows or shell script for Linux users) to make it easy to use and with less pain.
  • I would like to see the RunTime Viewer of Vugen in HPLoadRunner based on the browser I selected in the run-time configuration to make it feel more realistic as a real user.
  • Licensing cost is very high when we need to perform a test on application for a specific group of users.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Needs good documentation
  • Need to improve the performance of the tool
  • Setup is very complex and for such [a] commercial tool, it should easy and straightforward
  • Tool says it supports security testing but in reality, it is not at an extensive level.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
The only reason this isn't a '10' is because of the cost. This product is definitely meant for organizations who are serious about making sure they invest in the full ecosystem of API design, development, maintenance. But there is a significant cost associated with this investment. and because of this cost (and the non-tangible output for executives), it is a difficult line-item to justify in this post-pandemic environment.
Read full review
Usability
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
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
SoapUI allows us to combine multiple tests and adhere
to the sequence that they need to run in order to complete successfully.
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Apache
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
Soap UI has managed to continuously build on it's solid foundation and keep improving by each release. It is by far the most dependable and accurate testing tool out there of its kind. Available via connecting to VM's created as SoapUI test machines give access to it anytime, anywhere practically.
Read full review
Performance
Apache
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing.
Read full review
Support Rating
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
OpenText
Customer service is not that great. It's difficult to get hold of someone if an issue is supposed to be addressed on an urgent basis. No online chat service readily available.
Read full review
SmartBear
To be honest, we didnt had much issues with the support, as there is already plenty of online communities available for help. But if ever there were some minor issues with the membership or the certificates, the tech support was always quick and efficient enough to resolve the issue ASAP
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
no very easy but lacks documentation
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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
OpenText
HP performance center stacks up very well for front end applications. Need more improvements for API performance testing.
Read full review
SmartBear
ReadyAPI provides intuitive GUI capabilities compared to their own open source product. When compared to Postman, ReadyAPI also supports SOAP based services, which is a saver especially when integrating with legacy or other third party systems.
Read full review
Scalability
Apache
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing. However, I have read that added monitoring tools have been added, which if so the 7 could possibly go to a 8 or 9.
Read full review
Return on Investment
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
OpenText
  • The scripts created with traditional web/http protocol are not robust thus re-scripting is required after most every code drop. Troubleshooting and fixing the issue takes more time therefore in most cases we do re-scripting to keep it simple and save time.
  • In ideal world you would rather spend more time doing testing than scripting in that case mostly you could use an Ajax TruClient protocol. This type of script will only fail when an object in the application is removed or changed completely. This way of scripting will save you more time and helps you maintain the scripts with less re-work effort on a release basis. On the long run you will have a better ROI when you use Ajax TruClient protocol for scripting.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Very quick regression testing, hence having the testing results very soon, even the same day of deployment
  • for same above reason, it can save money for corporation (so no tedious, costly and erroneous manual testings)
  • The test reports are compatible with TestNG, so the corporation can integrate the reports in our Autamation frameworks such as Allure or Jira Zephyr
Read full review
ScreenShots