No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Silk Performer comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
7.0
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (6th)
OpenText Silk Performer
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
24th
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 November 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Apache JMeter is 8.5%, down from 14.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Performer is 1.5%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache JMeter8.5%
OpenText Silk Performer1.5%
Other90.0%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

TusharShankar - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Manager at Synechron
Performance testing has become central and reporting has provided clear insights for our teams
We do have command prompt related or CLI functionality with Apache JMeter, so it is easier. However, since it is open source, much work has not been put into the GUI part. The GUI could definitely be enhanced. One drawback which I can see when I compare it with other tools is the amount of cache that it uses, the memory that it uses. It becomes very difficult to work with when we have a lot of requests that need to be processed. Anything more than 10,000 requests becomes a bit of an unfavorable task when using Apache JMeter altogether. Otherwise, it does help anyone who is starting off with performance testing.
SR
Principal Software Architect at OpenText
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

"We find the ease of use and the reports and graphs available valuable."
"The metrics part of it and the ability to write your custom code to do some specific tests in the performance testing space are the most valuable features."
"It is very quick and user-friendly."
"It is scalable. It is cloud-based."
"JMeter's open-source nature allows us to create scripts easily, add any number of users during load tests, and handle large volumes of data without additional cost."
"I definitely recommend Apache JMeter to other users because it is an open-source tool; compared to LoadRunner, you save a significant amount of money, installation is hassle-free, and there are no additional components compared to other tools."
"JMeter is very easy for a user who doesn't have too much programming knowledge, as scripting is not mandatory nor essential to create the testing scenarios."
"Overall, I would rate Apache JMeter as eight to nine out of ten."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"We haven't used Silk on any project where it hasn't been able to support whatever we have needed."
 

Cons

"In this tool, automation in general is almost non-existent. Everything is done manually."
"The reports in Apache JMeter could improve."
"One of the drawbacks of JMeter is that it can't handle a large amount of load, which forces us to switch to other tools when we need to load more than a 5,000 or 10,000 user load."
"We would like some reporting and analysis tools to be added to this solution."
"At times when we overload the application, it gets stuck...After the solution gets stuck due to overloading, we have to restart our computers. In short, the solution keeps crashing."
"It does not support recording SSL."
"I think JMeter hangs up on large loads."
"Given that Apache JMeter is a free and open-source tool, documentation improvement may not be a major concern, as it is mostly contributed on a voluntary basis. The essential information is already available. However, in terms of the interface, there are occasional bugs, and the tool may not address them as quickly as some users would like. Fixing defects and bugs might take a considerable amount of time, with users sometimes having to wait for several months or even a year for the next release to address specific issues."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Free"
"This is an open-source solution, and there are no fees."
"We are using the free version, and if required, we can easily switch to the other version."
"The solution is open source with no user fees or licenses."
"Apache JMeter is a free tool."
"No licensing is required as it is a free, open-source tool."
"We are using the free version."
"JMeter is open source and available free of charge."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise62
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache JMeter?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the cost and license are free because Apache JMeter is open source.
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, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools. Updated: October 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.