We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare BlazeMeter vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Micro Focus, SmartBear and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: September 2021.
540,694 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"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.""They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us.""The stability is good.""It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials.""The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."

More BlazeMeter Pros »

"We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone.""The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable.""The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements.""It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched.""Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape.""I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent.""I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool.""With test execution, you have an option to create custom fields. It is also really user-friendly. With other tools, we only have restricted fields and we cannot customize or add new columns or fields that users can make use of while testing. ALM is very flexible for creating new fields. It is easy for users to understand the application."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pros »

Cons
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports.""Having more options for customization would be helpful.""The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots.""The reporting capabilities could be improved.""Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."

More BlazeMeter Cons »

"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system.""ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers.""There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky.""One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers.""When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects.""Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time.""Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way.""We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."

More BlazeMeter Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Compared to the market, the price is high.""Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive.""It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective.""Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license.""The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license.""Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment.""I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required.""Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
540,694 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The solution offers flexibility with its configurations.
Top Answer: The cost is a bit high for the Indian consumer. For a European or American user, the solution may not seem that expensive.
Top Answer: Documentation for the solution could be improved because there are some areas, such as licensing costs, where there is a lack of information regarding structure. I'd also like the ability to see a… more »
Top Answer: It is a tool, and it works. It has got good linkage and good traceability between the test cases and the defects. It has got lots of features for testing.
Top Answer: I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive.
Top Answer: It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other… more »
Ranking
Views
5,922
Comparisons
4,342
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
352
Rating
7.6
Views
16,813
Comparisons
10,493
Reviews
27
Average Words per Review
1,029
Rating
7.3
Comparisons
Also Known As
JMeter Cloud
HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
Learn More
Overview
CA BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery. The rapidly growing CA BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.

Micro Focus ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass to govern software quality and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes. Designed for complex multi-application environments, organizations can achieve high efficiency in their testing and measure quality with a requirements-driven and risk-based testing approach. Advanced reporting provides a complete view across all releases to gain new insights and make informed decisions. With numerous deployment options, open integrations with common tools and strong data controls, ALM/Quality Center is a perfect choice for enterprises that need to enforce standards, ensure compliance and adapt to changing tools.

Learn more:

Offer
Learn more about BlazeMeter
Learn more about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center
Sample Customers
DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Non Profit25%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company13%
Healthcare Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company31%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm8%
Government6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Comms Service Provider13%
Healthcare Company10%
Insurance Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm10%
Government6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business53%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise35%
REVIEWERS
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise73%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business7%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise78%
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Micro Focus, SmartBear and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: September 2021.
540,694 professionals have used our research since 2012.

BlazeMeter is ranked 7th in Performance Testing Tools with 5 reviews while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 27 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 7.6, while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Easy to navigate and offers reasonable pricing but needs grouping features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center writes "Makes it easy to go back and execute the same test every time with automation". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Neotys NeoLoad and Katalon Studio, whereas Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Tricentis qTest and TFS.

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.