BlazeMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Perforce Logo
6,373 views|3,700 comparisons
93% willing to recommend
OpenText Logo
4,560 views|2,707 comparisons
92% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that BlazeMeter provides easy access to its users while also ensuring that its reporting functionalities are good.""The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports.""The solution offers flexibility with its configurations.""The product's initial setup phase was simple.""Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options.""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.""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.""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."

More BlazeMeter Pros →

"The beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want.""The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool.""The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover.""The most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them.""The product’s most valuable feature is the Vuser license; it allows us to reduce the cost as per requirement.""It's a fast product, so you don't have much trouble in terms of maintenance overhead. You don't want to just look into configuring load generators, look for upgrades, and end up having that take up a lot of your time. With this solution, you just log in and you start using it. This means that there is a huge benefit in terms of the overhead of maintaining the infrastructure and the maintenance effort.""It's fast, easy to use, has a user-friendly UI, and you can split users.""The most valuable feature is the ability to configure browser settings for different operating systems and on different versions without the need to install every single version on each machine and to manage them."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud Pros →

Cons
"Version controlling of the test cases and the information, the ability to compare the current version and the previous version within Runscope would be really nice. The history shows who made the changes, but it doesn't compare the changes.""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.""The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive.""Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options.""A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools.""The tool fails to offer better parameterization to allow it to run the same script across different environments, making it a feature that needs a little improvement.""I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on.""The scanning capability needs improvement."

More BlazeMeter Cons →

"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud.""The support team provides delayed responses.""One area of improvement in the software's support is the replaying of captured data within the development environment. It would be beneficial if the replay feature could accurately mimic what the actual application is doing for better analysis and testing.""Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved.""I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check.""One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities.""Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask.""There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."
  • "The solution is free and open source."
  • "The product isn't cheap, but it isn't the most expensive on the market. During our proof of concept, we discovered that you get what you pay for; we found a cheaper solution we tested to be full of bugs. Therefore, we are willing to pay the higher price tag for the quality BlazeMeter offers."
  • "The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
  • "It's consumption-based pricing but with a ceiling. They're called CVUs, or consumption variable units. We can use API testing, GUI testing, and test data, but everything gets converted into CVUs, so we are free to use the platform in its entirety without getting bogged down by a license for certain testing areas. We know for sure how much we are going to spend."
  • "My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
  • "I rate the product's price two on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive. The solution is not expensive."
  • "When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
  • More BlazeMeter Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
  • "There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
  • "We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
  • "Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."
  • "The solution is expensive."
  • "It is expensive compared to other tools."
  • "LoadRunner always had expensive pricing. At my company, we used to evaluate LoadRunner, but we stuck with Silk Performer because its pricing was always better in the past. I do feel that I got a fair deal this time. Our value-added reseller and our sales guy worked hard to give us a fair deal. I feel that we got a fair deal. We did not go for the pay-as-you-go deal. I did an upfront package. I prefer that. I want to know what my costs are."
  • "The solution’s price is considerably high."
  • More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.
    Top Answer:The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs. However, Neustar has more reasonable pricing. Most people don't prefer Neustar, but it is a good solution.
    Top Answer:I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to… more »
    Top Answer:One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.
    Top Answer:The solution is a bit expensive. The pay-as-you-go model offered by LoadRunner Cloud is important to us, especially when considering the cost-effectiveness of performance testing.
    Ranking
    Views
    6,373
    Comparisons
    3,700
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    1,006
    Rating
    8.2
    Views
    4,560
    Comparisons
    2,707
    Reviews
    14
    Average Words per Review
    602
    Rating
    8.6
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    JMeter Cloud
    Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
    Learn More
    Overview

    BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery.

    The rapidly growing BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.

    Do your performance and load testing in the cloud. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud makes it easy to plan, run, and scale performance tests without the need to deploy and manage infrastructure.
    Sample Customers
    DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
    Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm30%
    Computer Software Company22%
    Non Profit13%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Retailer7%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm28%
    Educational Organization22%
    Retailer11%
    Government11%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Government8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business37%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise44%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise66%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise68%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2. 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 OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Supports multiple protocols and helps to ensure that our applications are stable at any given point". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BrowserStack and Sauce Labs, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and Oracle Application Testing Suite. See our BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud report.

    See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Performance 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.