We performed a comparison between Akamai CloudTest and BlazeMeter 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."The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."
"The solution is very stable."
"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."
"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"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."
"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."
"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."
"The test clip should be more user-friendly."
"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."
"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"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."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"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."
"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."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
Akamai CloudTest is ranked 12th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews. Akamai CloudTest is rated 7.6, while BlazeMeter is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Akamai CloudTest writes "Is easy to use and quick to setup, and does not require much resource capacity for medium instances". 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". Akamai CloudTest is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Tricentis NeoLoad, whereas BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack. See our Akamai CloudTest 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.