Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BlazeMeter vs LambdaTest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
10th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd), Load Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th)
LambdaTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LambdaTest is 5.6%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Manoj Raghavendra - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides global load simulations without managing infrastructure and offers built-in reporting features
BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for. The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use. Additionally, if there is no host in preferred locations such as some Asian or Middle Eastern countries, it might not be convenient to use BlazeMeter.
Dinesh Saharan - PeerSpot reviewer
The tool reduces the manual effort needed and helps automate certain tasks for users
I won't be able to comment on what could be improved in the solution since I am not the one who handles LambdaTest. It is our company's IT team that takes care of LambdaTest. Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis. If something is perfect, it doesn't mean that it doesn't need to improvise or improve, like in terms of adding new features. There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability is good."
"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."
"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."
"Running from the cloud with load distribution, exhibiting load from different geo-regions. Generating the load from different cloud regions is the best feature."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"The user interface is good."
"The most valuable feature is the real-time testing, which helps you to test your website on more than two thousand combinations of browsers and operating systems."
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"LambdaTest supports multiple platforms like iOS across different devices and enables real-time testing."
"The slow nature of a cloud platform was compensated with parallel testing, and now we are able to finish our testing job faster than it was before COVID."
"The solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."
"HyperExecute adds significant speed to execution, enhancing the overall testing process."
"Our test execution time was reduced to 16 mins from five hours when executed in parallel on multiple VMs. This has been extremely helpful!"
"This product offers out-of-the-box geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
 

Cons

"BlazeMeter needs more granular access control. Currently, BlazeMeter controls everything at a workspace level, so a user can view or modify anything inside that workspace depending on their role. It would be nice if there was a more granular control where you could say, "This person can only do A, B, and C," or, "This user only has access to functional testing. This user only has access to mock services." That feature set doesn't currently exist."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"There is scope for improvement in service account usage, LDAP integration, and adapting new devices and features."
"The tool can improve its testing speed. Changing or switching to another mobile phone can be very slow on a real device."
"The analytics over the automation dashboard can be more intuitive."
"LambdaTest needs to improve its speed and memory because it takes a long time to load."
"It would be much easier for us to read the test if they provided dashboard analytics."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"You cannot perform native-app testing, as they offer simulation for web testing only."
"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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 pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
"LambdaTest's pricing is cheaper than that of other similar platforms."
"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"LambdaTest is paid per execution."
"I used the product for free."
"The pricing could be made cheaper."
"From the customer side, LambdaTest is cheaper for big company usage and works fine as other similar applications."
"It is affordable as compared to similar SaaS solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Educational Organization
15%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
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?
BlazeMeter's pricing depends on the type of account used. They offer multiple account types, with cost variations based on features accessible under each account.
What do you like most about LambdaTest?
We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?
The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...
What needs improvement with LambdaTest?
The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting. There are specific use cases related to authentication and authoriz...
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. LambdaTest and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.