Load Tests: Jmeter vs Artillery

Hello guys,

Continuing on reviewing some performance test tools, today I am going to post a comparison of Jmeter and Artillery. Most people still prefer to use Jmeter as it has been longer in the market, but it is always good to check your other options and see what better fits for your project. I have used Locust and Artillery recently and they are also great tools easy to maintain and to create your scripts.

Just to remind again:

Jmeter is a great and powerful tool, but depending on what you really need (something more lighter) then Jmeter might become an overcomplex, slow, hard to maintain tool.

Jmeter Artillery
In-built Protocols Support
  • HTTP
  • FTP
  • JDBC
  • SOAP
  • LDAP
  • TCP
  • JMS
  • SMTP
  • POP3
  • IMAP
  • HTTP
  • Socket.io
  • WebSocket
Speed to write tests
  • Slow
  • Fast
Support of β€œTest as Code”
  • GUI oriented
  • Possibility to create scripts, but too complex and lack of documentation
  • Weak (Java)
  • Hard to maintain
  • Scripts oriented
  • Strong (JSON/YAML – YAML is the recommended format since it allows comments)
  • Easier to maintain
Ramp-up Flexibility
  • Plugins available to be able to configure flexible load
  • Supports ramp-up phases and flexible load
Test Results Analyzing
  • Yes
  • Yes
Resources Consumption
  • Heavy to run tests with multiple users on a single machine, more memory consumption
  • Light to run tests with multiple users on a single machine, less memory consumption
  • Doesn’t take up so many of your machines’ resources
  • Multicore support

Easy to use with Version Control Systems
  • No
  • Yes
Number of Concurrent Users
  • Thousands, under restrictions
  • Thousands
Recording Functionality
  • Yes
  • No
Distributed Execution
  • Yes
  • Yes
Load Tests Monitoring
  • Add listeners, but consume more memory
  • No. Reports are only created at the end or you can check the terminal logs.

Concurrent users low than expected in the scenario Β· Issue #434 ...


Jmeter is most used when:

  • You need to perform a complex load including different protocols
  • If you need the script recording functionality
  • Require that a full scenario be written for every test
  • If you need to simulate specific load with some custom ramp-up patterns
  • If you just prefer UI desktop app for scripts creation, or you just do not know Javascript/YAML/JSON well enough


Artillery solves some specific problems:

  • You can write performance scripts pretty fast, there is even a “quick” mode (where you don’t need to create any script)
  • Push to your VCS and easily maintain the scripts
  • Artillery has WebSocket support out of the box and native support for Socket.io
  • Spend minimum time on maintenance without additional GUI applications
  • Simulate thousands of test users on local machine without the need to have multiple slaves as it uses Node.js is easier to install and lightweight




2 thoughts on “Load Tests: Jmeter vs Artillery

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.