We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Tricentis Flood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"For me, the best part is that we can graphically see the test result at runtime. It helps us understand the behavior of the application during all stages of the test."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"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."
"I don't think I can generate a JMX file unless I run JMeter, which is one of my concerns when it comes to BlazeMeter."
"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."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"One problem, while we are executing a test, is that it will take some time to download data. Let's say I'm performance testing with a high-end load configuration. It takes a minimum of three minutes or so to start the test itself. That's the bad part of the performance testing... every time I rerun the same test, it is downloaded again... That means I have to wait for three to four minutes again."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"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 solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Load Testing Tools with 41 reviews while Tricentis Flood is ranked 18th in Load Testing Tools. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Tricentis Flood is rated 7.0. 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 Tricentis Flood writes "Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and RadView WebLOAD, whereas Tricentis Flood is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad. See our BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis Flood report.
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.
