Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Test Workbench comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache JMeter
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in API Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (1st)
IBM Rational Test Workbench
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
19th
Ranking in API Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (36th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Apache JMeter is 22.8%, down from 24.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Alex Logan - PeerSpot reviewer
GUI needs improvement, and it is not easy to learn, it requires upfront learning
The graphical user interface could be improved. In this tool, automation in general is almost non-existent. Everything is done manually. I would advise those who put this together to try to simplify it for their end users, such as being able to automate at their desks. Such as manual relations and social management. Purely on the feature set, it lacks automation, therefore it requires a lot of manual work.
KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
Good integration with other tools, stable, scales easily
There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation. This includes the workbench as well as the other tools. In the future, I would like to see the other types of tests supported, that are not already covered in the DevOps approach. This would include, for example, penetration testing.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is open source as well as relatively extendable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features. Its deployment is also very easy."
"It is easy to set up."
"JMeter can be integrated with most open-source platforms like Grafana, Prometheus, or even with custom-made tools by extending it and integrating from GitHub."
"It's very useful for performance and load testing."
"We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"JMeter's most valuable feature is the RegEx Extractor."
"They can easily view the results and gain valuable insights."
"When someone in our organization wants to test web applications, they use Apache JMeter since they face no hurdles while using the solution."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
 

Cons

"You really need a technical team in order to really utilize the product."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner we can go from the UI and we can configure it. There is no such feature in Apache JMeter. There should be UI-based recording history or logs."
"JMeter output reports can be difficult to understand without training."
"I sometimes found the documentation to be not as explanatory as I would've liked it. In the cases that I can think of, I was looking for a rather hand-holding approach with Step A, B, and C, but then I realized that with a product that is open source like this, you can't do handholding. That is because there are so many different uses and different unique environments and setups for it, but I remember thinking a few times that if they only just said this."
"It requires integration with other tools for live metrics, which is time-consuming."
"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."
"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."
"From an improvement perspective, consider a scenario where your application needs to retrieve data from PayPal and store it in an Excel file in an external network."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is free."
"In terms of open-source adoption, it is completely free."
"When comparing the price with Load Runner, and if the cost is an issue then JMeter is a better choice"
"We use the open source version."
"The main reason we chose Apache JMeter is that it is cost-effective and easy to use. There is no need to pay for additional services. Additionally, it does not require additional payment to vendors. The solution is open-source and free."
"The solution is open source."
"The solution is open source with no user fees or licenses."
"We are using the free version, and if required, we can easily switch to the other version."
"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
32%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Postman compare with Apache JMeter?
Postman lets you easily define variables, which then get updated automatically. This is a huge time-saver and makes processes very efficient. We can also export the test cases we create and share t...
How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?
Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and performance testing, enabling users to monitor and test public and private APIs. We ...
What do you like most about Apache JMeter?
I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter
Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AOL, Orbitz, Innopath Software, PrepMe, Sapient, Corporate Express Australia, CSIRO, Ephibian, Talis, DATACOM, ALALOOP, eFusion, Panter, Sourcepole, University of Western Cape
Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache JMeter vs. IBM Rational Test Workbench and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.