Apache JMeter vs. ReadyAPI vs. TestComplete

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched

• 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.

• 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).

Incentivized

• Identifying UI objects and application structure
• Expandability of tests through scripts and script extensions/plugins
• low barrier of entry (you can get started quickly, and other's don't need much explanation to contribute on a basic level)
• Possibility of Jira integration for reporting
• Relatively few (and usually easy to solve) git conflicts when working simultaneously
• easy handling of test data, also for iterative tests

Incentivized

• 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.

• 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.

Incentivized

• TestComplete could stand to have a simplified view for different types of users. For instance, as a manager/architecture guy, I'm not so interested in getting into the code and am more interested in file-based interactions.
• TestComplete could use more integration with reporting for things like TeamCity to improve test status visibility.

Incentivized

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

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.

Incentivized

We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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

It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.

Incentivized

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.

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.

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.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

Some bugs were quickly resolved, but most UX quirks of the tool are just marked "as designed". No follow up for enhancement request.

Incentivized

no very easy but lacks documentation

If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers

Incentivized

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.

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.

Incentivized

TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.

Incentivized

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.

• 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.

Incentivized

• 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

Incentivized

• Saves hundreds of man-hours with either QA testing or data entry
• With the small cost of the product, it has saved the company money with both employee costs as well as the cost of mistakes made by human error or software bugs

Incentivized