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

BlazeMeter vs CrossBrowserTesting comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 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
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd), Load Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.6%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.8%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Bala Maddu - PeerSpot reviewer
Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases
Overall, it's helped our ability to address test data challenges. The test data features on their own are very good, but version control test data isn't included yet. I think that's an area for improvement. We can update the test data on the cloud. That's a good feature. There's also test data management, which is good. [Runscope] doesn't have the test data management yet. Mock services do, and performance testing has it. We can do the same test through JMeter, validating the same criteria, but the feedback from [Runscope] is quite visible. We can see the request and the response, what data comes back, and add the validation criteria. We can manage the test environments and test data, but running the same API request for multiple test data is missing. We cloned the test cases multiple times to run it. They need to work on that. Version controlling of the test cases and the information, the ability to compare the current version and the previous version within [Runscope] would be really nice. The history shows who made the changes, but it doesn't compare the changes. In the future, I would like to see integrations with GitLab and external Git reports so we could have some sort of version control outside as well. There is no current mechanism for that. The ability to have direct imports of spoken API specifications instead of converting them to JSON would be nice. There are some features they could work on.
Michael Hutchison - PeerSpot reviewer
Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems
The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default. Every time, I have to select the full screen, then restart its captures, which seems a waste of time and energy. This is, admittedly, a minor complaint.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based nature, which allows us to conduct tests without relying on local resources."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"In our company, various teams use BlazeMeter, particularly appreciating its cloud license software, which supports up to 5,000 users. BlazeMeter's cloud capabilities allow us to load test or simulate traffic from any location worldwide, such as Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and even specific cities like Delhi. So, with one cloud license, we can simulate user load from various locations globally."
"It is focused on concurrency testing, which has been especially beneficial for us. Their previous experiences had caused major setbacks."
"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 user interface is good."
"It is a stable solution. When we compare BlazeMeter with other tools in the market, I can say that the solution's overall performance has also been very good in our company."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"I must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."
"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, when we execute tests, the results calculated by BlazeMeter, specifically the response times for failed transactions, are incorrect."
"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"The customer service is not available 24/7, which affects its rating. I would rate it as a seven because they respond once they are available."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved."
"The pricing is high"
"BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for."
"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."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"The solution is free and open source."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
26%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Government
9%
Real Estate/Law Firm
8%
 

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 requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. CrossBrowserTesting and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.