We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and k6 Open Source based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Load Testing Tools."The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"The most valuable aspect of BlazeMeter is its user-friendly nature, ability to conduct distributed load testing and comprehensive analysis and reporting features. It particularly excels in providing a clear and organized view of load test results."
"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"The feature that stands out the most is their action groups. They act like functions or methods and code, allowing us to reuse portions of our tests. That also means we have a single point for maintenance when updates are required. Instead of updating a hundred different test cases, we update one action group, and the test cases using that action group will update."
"One thing that we are doing a lot with the solution, and it's very good, is orchestrating a lot of JMeter agents. This feature has helped us a lot because we can reuse other vendors' performance scripts that they have used with JMeter before."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."
"The tool's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"BlazeMeter needs more granular access control. Currently, BlazeMeter controls everything at a workspace level, so a user can view or modify anything inside that workspace depending on their role. It would be nice if there was a more granular control where you could say, "This person can only do A, B, and C," or, "This user only has access to functional testing. This user only has access to mock services." That feature set doesn't currently exist."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"My only complaint is about the technical support, where sometimes I found that they would not read into and understand the details of my question before answering it."
"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Load Testing Tools with 41 reviews while k6 Open Source is ranked 17th in Load Testing Tools with 2 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while k6 Open Source is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of k6 Open Source writes "Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and SmartBear LoadNinja, whereas k6 Open Source is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad and RadView WebLOAD.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
