We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."What I like best about Apache JMeter is its user-friendly GUI because even if you don't have very good coding knowledge or understanding, or even if you don't come from a development background, you can still use the solution with just a few clicks. This is what's unique about Apache JMeter, in comparison with other tools in the market. As Apache JMeter is open source, when there's a missing feature, you can search in several community blogs for plugins that you can use to modify Apache JMeter to meet your requirements, and this is another advantage."
"It's a free tool."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jenkins and the reporting."
"API testing, Database Testing, and MQ testing can be done with ease."
"Very user-friendly and easy to use."
"It is an open-source tool that is easy to use. It can be easily integrated with multiple tools, including Selenium."
"We appreciate that the solution is free to use, as an open-source tool."
"We are using it just for load testing. We are using its free version, and it is scalable."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"It is a stable solution."
"The UI could be better."
"Improving JMeter's sync time would be beneficial."
"Automation is difficult in JMeter."
"The solution could use some sort of educational features to offer tips and hints to help users navigate it better. They should improve the manuals and help files."
"In terms of setup, it could be nicer, to be honest. Sometimes, I get a little bit lost."
"The tool needs to have a better Graphical User Interface. Many of the solution's features are difficult to understand due to the complex user interface and user experience. The product needs to add plugins. It should also work on the integration with external partners like IDE and API gateways."
"If the solution was GUI based, I believe that it would be more versatile."
"The only thing is the learning curve. It's high."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
Apache JMeter is ranked 3rd in API Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 4th in API Testing Tools with 90 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.