We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and LambdaTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"With the help of the Mock Services, we are overcoming everything. Wherever we are facing issues, whether they will be long term or temporary, by implementing the Mock Services we can bypass the faulty components that are not needed for our particular testing."
"I really like the recording because when I use the JMeter the scripting a lot of recording it takes me a lot of time to get used to. The BlazeMeter the recording is quick."
"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."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"The orchestration feature is the most valuable. It's like the tourist backend component of BlazeMeter. It allows me to essentially give BlazeMeter multiple JMeter scripts and a YAML file, and it will orchestrate and execute that load test and all those scripts as I define them."
"The UI is pretty clean and easy to navigate, and we were able to figure it out very quickly."
"The most valuable feature is the real-time testing, which helps you to test your website on more than two thousand combinations of browsers and operating systems."
"Without a doubt, LambdaTest is one of the big reasons behind our faster deployment and better team collaboration."
"The most valuable features are that it's essentially on-demand, and you only focus on getting the code that needs to be executed without having to worry about the OS, hardware, etc."
"The slow nature of a cloud platform was compensated with parallel testing, and now we are able to finish our testing job faster than it was before COVID."
"In case something goes wrong at LambdaTest end, the Support team is extremely responsive to analyze any platform-related issues."
"LambdaTest easily integrates with leading project management, bug tracking, and CI-CD tools like Jira, Asana, Jenkins, Circle CI, and more."
"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."
"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"We encountered some minor bugs, and I would like to have the ability to add load generators to workspaces without having to use APIs. We can't do that now, so we're beholden to the APIs."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"I would like to see all of the features available in the freemium plan so that I can test them."
"I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis...There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time."
"We get logged out of the devices if there is some inactivity."
"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"Load flow compared to other stacks needs improvement."
"I feel that the automated screenshot testing takes a little longer on MacOS sometimes."
BlazeMeter is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 41 reviews while LambdaTest is ranked 14th in Functional Testing Tools with 22 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while LambdaTest is rated 8.8. 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 LambdaTest writes "Technical support should be improved, though it has great documentation". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas LambdaTest is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio and Perfecto. See our BlazeMeter vs. LambdaTest report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional 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.
