We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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.
"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."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that BlazeMeter provides easy access to its users while also ensuring that its reporting functionalities are good."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the Vuser license; it allows us to reduce the cost as per requirement."
"The most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them."
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I"
"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to configure browser settings for different operating systems and on different versions without the need to install every single version on each machine and to manage them."
"The beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"The Timeline Report panel has no customization options. One feature that I missed was not having a time filter, which I had in ELK. For example, there are only filter requests for a time of less than 5 seconds."
"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 product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"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."
"We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"The product price could be more affordable."
"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"Sometimes, you are utilizing one of the low generators, then all of a sudden if you discontinue from one project, it actually deletes the entire low generator."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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 OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Perfecto and BrowserStack, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and OpenText UFT One. See our BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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.
