We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and SmartBear LoadNinja 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."It is easy to set up."
"It's easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature for us is the available information on the forums and to be able to discuss and get answers from the people that are involved in using this tool."
"JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process."
"The most valuable feature of Apache JMeter is its popularity. It is the best open-source tool with all the features needed."
"We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"The solution has good transition controllers and distributed testing."
"It's a free tool."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"I need to consider it further because as features increase, it might become more complicated, and my goal has always been simplicity. Currently, I have to focus on other tasks, and I'm handling multiple responsibilities, so I can't juggle everything at once. However, if you ask me, I believe EJB covers most functionalities that are crucial. One improvement I'd suggest is adding a graphical aspect to the Gateway, making it a bit more colorful. Unlike JMeter, which lacks color, having a bit of color in the graphical aspects would be beneficial. Overall, for the essential features, EJB should work fine."
"They should improve the solution on its UI front."
"There are certain things like we can't merge custom metrics into the JMeter reports. We're limited to JMeter metrics, and other server metrics can't be integrated with JMeter dashboard. This forces us to rely on another tool."
"The reports in Apache JMeter could improve."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"Running JMeter in GUI mode uses a lot of memory, which means we need to switch to a non-GUI mode when using a heavy load."
"JMeter's reporting is extremely rudimentary. The fundamental reporting mechanisms need to be drastically improved. It doesn't utilize an automatic session management mechanism or methods other tools use like parsing cookies and variables. Everything needs to be done manually. There's no automation."
"It has some proxy-based dependencies which require specific proxies to be set up or disabled, which causes problems."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"It needs time to mature."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while SmartBear LoadNinja is ranked 14th in Performance Testing Tools with 3 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while SmartBear LoadNinja is rated 7.4. 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 SmartBear LoadNinja writes "Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and Tricentis Tosca, whereas SmartBear LoadNinja is most compared with ReadyAPI Performance, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad and Selenium HQ. See our Apache JMeter vs. SmartBear LoadNinja 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.