We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We find the ease of use and the reports and graphs available valuable."
"It is cost-effective and simple to use."
"It's stable and reliable."
"We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"It's very easy to install, and it's very easy to code and develop the script."
"The recording and playback functionality is helpful."
"This solution is very user-friendly, and allows for a lot of data capture when testing."
"JMeter is user-friendly, and that's a notable advantage of JVTech. It's straightforward and easy to use, unlike some other load testing tools, making it very easy to understand."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"We don't find any features lacking. One of the most beneficial points we have from LoadRunner is we start sizing our infrastructure accordingly. So what we do is when we deploy a new workload, we do performance testing."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The solution is quite stable."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users."
"Apache JMeter could use improvement in reporting. Currently, it isn't easy to generate reports in PDF format. While receiving reports in PDF format is possible, it requires a lot of customization. Additionally, when comparing the load test to others solutions it could improve."
"At present, if the number of virtual users increases beyond 10,000 when testing, then it results in a Java heap which causes the solution to crash."
"The memory utilization in JMeter is very poor."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"Apache should have a graphic interface."
"If the solution was GUI based, I believe that it would be more versatile."
"It's not easy to get the data from one place or to do customizations."
"The UI needs some work. The first time I used JMeter, I couldn't record the full scenario to mimic the user experience. Since then, they have introduced some plugins and a third-party tool called BlazeMeter."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"There's a reporting part of the cloud that could be improved a little bit."
"Improvement wise, the pipeline should be enabled. It should be embedded as part of the tool itself rather than going with third-party tools. Monitoring should be more effective as well."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"The technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. 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 LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and ReadyAPI, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis Tosca. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance 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.