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

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Silk Performer comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Load Testing Tools
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (3rd)
OpenText Silk Performer
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Apache JMeter is 21.7%, down from 24.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Performer is 1.0%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Sreenivasula Mukkamalla - PeerSpot reviewer
Leveraging cost-effective customization with powerful plugins but complexity reduction needed
Apache JMeter offers plugins for reporting and preparing test scenarios. It allows recording to customization, letting you download plugins to connect with databases or external systems. Despite being open source, it offers features comparable to paid tools, and its ability to customize and expand is particularly useful. Additionally, its open-source nature makes it cost-effective.
SR
Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy
In terms of areas of improvement, I would say the Silk Performance Explorer tool, which is used for monitoring and analysis, can be improved because that's where we spend most of our time when we're analyzing the test data. Any enhancements that can be provided in the monitoring sphere would be useful. When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test. The interface for the scripting could be more feature-rich. Integration with tools like Prometheus or Grafana where we can visualize the data would be great. As things stand, we have to use one monitoring tool to visualize data and another for visualizing the test metrics. Integration would enable us to see the metrics from Silk and correlate that with the metrics from other servers or other processes we're monitoring. It would save having to look at Silk data and server metrics separately. It's the way things are going with newer tools. I think the solution is being phased out by Micro Focus and their emphasis is focused more on LoadRunner. We haven't seen much development in the last few years.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The scripting ability is most valuable. It is easy to use. There is a UI, and you can go in there and figure those things out. After you've got a good set of tests, you basically have a scripted document that you can grab and execute in a pipeline. It is pretty quick to set up, and you can scale it and version control it."
"Due to process automation, I don't have to prepare reports, making it the perfect solution."
"When there's a high number of TPS I can achieve more transactions per seconds given the hyper-limitations."
"User-friendly and open source."
"We had some challenges testing HTTP/2 APIs, which are becoming more prevalent with advancements like 5G. So, we added another plugin to help with HTTP/2 API load testing. Apache JMeter, with additional plugins, now supports HTTP/2, which is critical as everyone moves from HTTP/1 to HTTP/2."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"Overall, I would rate Apache JMeter as eight to nine out of ten."
"The solution's initial setup is easy."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
 

Cons

"Apache JMeter's UI can be made more colorful."
"What needs improvement in Apache JMeter is the very high load requirements when you want to scale it beyond certain thresholds. For example, small to mid-range testing is very easily done with Apache JMeter, but if you scale and increase the load, then it would be a problem because the tool consumes a lot of resources, probably because Apache JMeter provides an enriched UI experience, so it consumes a lot of memory and requires high CPU usage. This means you have to manage your infrastructure, or else you'll have high overhead expenses. As Apache JMeter is a heavyweight tool, that is an area for improvement, though I'm unsure if Apache can do something about it because it could be a result of the way it's architected. What I'd like to see from Apache JMeter in the future is for it to transition to the cloud, as a lot of cloud technologies emerge around the globe, and a lot of people prefer cloud-based solutions or cloud-native tools. Even if a company has a legacy system, it's still possible to transition to the cloud. I've worked with a company that was an on-premise company that moved to the cloud and became cloud-native. If Apache JMeter could transition to the cloud, similar to k6, then it could help lessen the intense resource consumption that's currently happening in Apache JMeter."
"The solution's setup could be easier and security could be improved to minimize vulnerabilities."
"They should improve the solution on its UI front."
"The solution is not user-friendly, there is no framework for autocorrelation or parameterization."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"For UI automation, it is limited and therefore rates a one."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Since it's free, there's no need for extensive support or improvements in pricing."
"This is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs involved."
"JMeter is open source and available free of charge."
"Apache JMeter is a free tool."
"In terms of open-source adoption, it is completely free."
"This is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs associated with it."
"I was using the free version of the software."
"We are using the free version, and if required, we can easily switch to the other version."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
852,649 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
29%
Computer Software Company
14%
Retailer
6%
Sports Company
6%
 

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
Micro Focus Silk Performer, Silk Performer
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AOL, Orbitz, Innopath Software, PrepMe, Sapient, Corporate Express Australia, CSIRO, Ephibian, Talis, DATACOM, ALALOOP, eFusion, Panter, Sourcepole, University of Western Cape
University of Colorado, Medidata, Monash University
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Load Testing Tools. Updated: May 2025.
852,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.