We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing 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."Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"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."
"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."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"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."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"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."
"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."
"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 BlazeMeter vs. Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing 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.