We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Galen Framework based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"The stability is good."
"The orchestration feature is the most valuable. It's like the tourist backend component of BlazeMeter. It allows me to essentially give BlazeMeter multiple JMeter scripts and a YAML file, and it will orchestrate and execute that load test and all those scripts as I define them."
"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."
"The feature that stands out the most is their action groups. They act like functions or methods and code, allowing us to reuse portions of our tests. That also means we have a single point for maintenance when updates are required. Instead of updating a hundred different test cases, we update one action group, and the test cases using that action group will update."
"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."
"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."
"What I like most about Galen Framework are its advantages, particularly its spec language and the spec file feature."
"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"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."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"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."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"There don't seem to be functions available for automatically generating Galen values based on the specifications in the spec file, and this could be a potential improvement for Galen Framework."
BlazeMeter is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 41 reviews while Galen Framework is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools with 2 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Galen Framework is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Galen Framework writes "Scalable with strong reporting capabilities". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas Galen Framework is most compared with .
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional 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.
