BlazeMeter vs BrowserStack comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (4th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.6%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BrowserStack is 12.8%, up from 8.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
Unique Categories:
Performance Testing Tools
17.7%
Load Testing Tools
17.0%
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

Lalit Parkale - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 18, 2022
Saves us $50,000 annually on infrastructure costs, increases delivery velocity, and improves productivity
It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds 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 solution is completely built on an open-source stack. Before performance testing, we used JMeter. There's flexibility in choosing Gatling, Locust, Taurus, or other open-source technologies. We're able to attract good talent in the market. They like open-source because it's lightweight, accessible, and quick. That's been a strong point. We integrated user access management, so it's easy for consumers to actually use it. It has great reporting features and integrations. It can connect to AppDynamics, Dynatrace, and Splunk. Another great feature is that it meets the various maturity levels in our organization. We still have manual-based testing, and there are some teams that are very engineering and code focused. BlazeMeter helps meet all those maturity levels. For example, a manual tester who wants to get into automation can use the scriptless feature. Even business people can use the record and playback function and record the business process. That is captured into JMeter and Selenium scripts, and they can continue executing that. The solution enables the creation of test data that can be used both for the performance and functional testing of any application. Currently, we aren't using the test data feature in BlazeMeter. It took us a year to realize the benefits because we had to do the design work and the network enablement piece for teams to start using it at that scale. BlazeMeter helps bridge Agile and CoE teams. We define CoE as the center of enablement, not a center of excellence. We don't have central teams. We use the hub and spoke model. The hub is basically the central enablement team. We provide BlazeMeter as a service in the bank, and we manage, maintain, and govern it, but individual teams have federated autonomy. The solution helps us implement shift-left testing. We're still in that stage, and we have various maturity levels in our organization. We have between 6,000 and 7,000 engineers. Out of that, around 2,000 are manual testers. The maturity level across those many thousands of engineers is varied. Some teams have definitely embedded shift left, and BlazeMeter is good at that. They can use YAML files and start shifting left. That means the developers are able to have YAML definitions in their code to do smaller performance load tests. We use the solution's scriptless testing functionality. We have many testers who use scriptless testing now. The record and playback function is also one of the key aspects. The manual testers are definitely getting more confident that they can start moving toward automation. People are finding that the existing test automation helps to build their test cases quicker. They struggled with JMeter as a tool. They had to learn various nuances. With scriptless testing, recording, and playback, they don't have to worry about that. BlazeMeter definitely decreased our test cycle times. During each cycle, we're saving between one to two hours. We enabled integration between BlazeMeter and AppDynamics, so people don't have to log into multiple tools to do their analysis. BlazeMeter provides a single pane of glass to do the analysis. It essentially saves days in the sprint because they would execute a test, then go into AppDynamics, the SCOM, or the IIS logs. To fetch the IIS logs, they would have to wait for the operations team to give them access.
SB
Mar 2, 2023
Great browser testing across platforms but issues with stability
I mainly use BrowserStack for browser testing BrowserStack has allowed us to do tests to cover criteria we couldn't do previously. BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile. One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"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."
"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"The stability is good."
"The most valuable aspect of BlazeMeter is its user-friendly nature, ability to conduct distributed load testing and comprehensive analysis and reporting features. It particularly excels in providing a clear and organized view of load test results."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."
"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"The integration is very good."
"It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved."
"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 reporting capabilities could be improved."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"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."
"Sometimes, when we execute tests, the results calculated by BlazeMeter, specifically the response times for failed transactions, are incorrect."
"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."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."
"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"It's consumption-based pricing but with a ceiling. They're called CVUs, or consumption variable units. We can use API testing, GUI testing, and test data, but everything gets converted into CVUs, so we are free to use the platform in its entirety without getting bogged down by a license for certain testing areas. We know for sure how much we are going to spend."
"The solution is free and open source."
"The product isn't cheap, but it isn't the most expensive on the market. During our proof of concept, we discovered that you get what you pay for; we found a cheaper solution we tested to be full of bugs. Therefore, we are willing to pay the higher price tag for the quality BlazeMeter offers."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"The price is fine."
"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
18%
Retailer
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?
Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and performance testing, enabling users to monitor and test public and private APIs. We ...
What do you like most about BlazeMeter?
It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BlazeMeter?
The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs. However, Neustar has more reasonable pricing. Most people don't prefer Neustar, but it is a good solution.
What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. BrowserStack and other solutions. Updated: June 2024.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.