Compare BlazeMeter vs. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional
 |
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | |
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time." "BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process." "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." | "LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool." "It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance." "Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website." "The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period." "The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward." "The solution is quite stable." "The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features." "I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good." |
Cons | |
"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." "A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools." "In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports." "Having more options for customization would be helpful." | "If they can make LoadRunner more comprehensive, it would really help." "Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement." "There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner." "The price of this solution should be cheaper." "Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues." "I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients." "The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive." "The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow." |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan." | "I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing." "The licensing fees are based on the number of users." "It is competing with other products that may cost significantly less or may be available as open-source. Because of that it is relatively expensive." "LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product." "This is not a cheap product." "There is a licensing cost that is expensive." More Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice » |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs. 457,209 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Questions from the Community | |
Top Answer: 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. Top Answer: In terms of improvement, I would like it to have the ability to customize reports. Top Answer: Our primary use case is to create processes for performance. I created a one time function and implemented it for 1,000 users. | Top Answer: LoadRunner is the best load testing tool, however, it is very expensive. The factors to purchase are:
1. It can simulate load a large number of concurrent users using small HW resources (CPU memory)… more » |
Ranking  | |
Views 5,707 Comparisons 4,116 Reviews 6 Average Words per Review 261 Rating 8.5 | Views 16,126 Comparisons 11,609 Reviews 15 Average Words per Review 492 Rating 7.8 |
Popular Comparisons | |
 Compared 34% of the time.  Compared 10% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time.  Compared 6% of the time. Compared 4% of the time. | Compared 20% of the time. Compared 16% of the time. Compared 11% of the time. Compared 10% of the time.  Compared 4% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| JMeter Cloud | Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner |
Learn | |
| Broadcom | Micro Focus |
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. | LoadRunner is the Micro Focus industry-standard software solution for application performance and load testing. LoadRunner stresses your entire system to isolate and identify potential client, network, and server bottlenecks, supporting performance testing of new technologies together with your existing, legacy applications. |
Offer | |
Learn more about BlazeMeter | Learn more about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional |
Sample Customers | |
| DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub | JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media |
Top Industries | |
Computer Software Company35% Comms Service Provider14% Financial Services Firm7% Media Company7% | Financial Services Firm28% Computer Software Company24% Comms Service Provider12% Healthcare Company8% Computer Software Company45% Comms Service Provider14% Government6% Financial Services Firm6% |
Company Size | |
Small Business64% Midsize Enterprise7% Large Enterprise29% | Small Business20% Midsize Enterprise11% Large Enterprise69% Small Business6% Midsize Enterprise5% Large Enterprise89% |
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
457,209 professionals have used our research since 2012.
BlazeMeter is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 16 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.6, while Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Enables us to monitor our application instances as well as our database to see where the bottlenecks are". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional writes "Good synchronization capabilities but pilot processing needs improvement". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Neotys NeoLoad, Tricentis Flood and Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, whereas Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter, Neotys NeoLoad and Selenium HQ. See our BlazeMeter vs. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional report.
See our list of best Performance 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.