We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and BlazeMeter based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Since JMeter has limited scalability, BlazeMeter is the clear winner in this comparison.
"I like the fact that JMeter integrates well with other tools."
"The reporting features are really good. There's a lot less latency than other solutions."
"We find the ease of use and the reports and graphs available valuable."
"The product helps me get the expected performance from applications or servers and reduces costs. It also enhances the performance of the services and helped them reach their ultimate capacity."
"The solution helps by detecting bottlenecks."
"Apache JMeter is quite flexible."
"JMeter is user-friendly, and that's a notable advantage of JVTech. It's straightforward and easy to use, unlike some other load testing tools, making it very easy to understand."
"It gives accurate results and recommendations that we can implement to enhance the performance of websites."
"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."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"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."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"It has some proxy-based dependencies which require specific proxies to be set up or disabled, which causes problems."
"Considering the kinds of tests we are performing here, where we launch several tests at the same time as a batch request, JMeter is not the best tool for the job. Those kinds of things could be done easily with other tools, like T6."
"Report generation needs to be improved. It is quite difficult to get to."
"They can improve it a little bit in terms of distribution load testing. We struggled with it during the distribution. In terms of reporting, runtime monitoring is not currently included, and it should be included. They can also improve it on the reporting side in terms of the comparison of the reports. They can also focus more on integration with CI/CD. Currently, people are using their own customized tools. It would be nice if Apache can provide some standard tools and procedures for integration with CI/CD tools like DPR. There are some tools, but it would be nice if official standard tools and procedures are available."
"Apache JMeter may have difficulty recognizing dynamic objects in some critical cases, which can lead to challenges in terms of object identification."
"In this tool, automation in general is almost non-existent. Everything is done manually."
"I need to consider it further because as features increase, it might become more complicated, and my goal has always been simplicity. Currently, I have to focus on other tasks, and I'm handling multiple responsibilities, so I can't juggle everything at once. However, if you ask me, I believe EJB covers most functionalities that are crucial. One improvement I'd suggest is adding a graphical aspect to the Gateway, making it a bit more colorful. Unlike JMeter, which lacks color, having a bit of color in the graphical aspects would be beneficial. Overall, for the essential features, EJB should work fine."
"Given that Apache JMeter is a free and open-source tool, documentation improvement may not be a major concern, as it is mostly contributed on a voluntary basis. The essential information is already available. However, in terms of the interface, there are occasional bugs, and the tool may not address them as quickly as some users would like. Fixing defects and bugs might take a considerable amount of time, with users sometimes having to wait for several months or even a year for the next release to address specific issues."
"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."
"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."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"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 seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while BlazeMeter is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". Apache JMeter is most compared with Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and ReadyAPI, whereas BlazeMeter is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BrowserStack and Perfecto. See our Apache JMeter vs. BlazeMeter 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.
