We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and RadView WebLOAD 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."It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds the on-premises hosting solutions, so we have implemented a hybrid approach. BlazeMeter sets us up for our traditional hosting platforms and application stack as well as the modern cloud-based or SaaS-based application technologies."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"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 product's initial setup phase was simple."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"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 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."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"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."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews while RadView WebLOAD is ranked 11th in Performance Testing Tools with 9 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while RadView WebLOAD is rated 8.2. 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 RadView WebLOAD writes "IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and k6 Open Source, whereas RadView WebLOAD is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and k6 Open Source. See our BlazeMeter vs. RadView WebLOAD 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.