We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Load Testing Tools."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 stability is good."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"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."
"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 product's initial setup phase was simple."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"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."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"The reporting capabilities 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."
"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."
"A lot of time you start the stress testing, and you sign the log in again, and I want to get rid of that. It's just not clear to me how to do it yet."
More Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing Pricing and Cost Advice →
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Load Testing Tools with 41 reviews while Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is ranked 16th in Load Testing Tools with 3 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is rated 9.0. 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 Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing writes "User-friendly, cheap, and quick to set up". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is most compared with Apache JMeter.
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.