We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that BlazeMeter provides easy access to its users while also ensuring that its reporting functionalities are good."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds the 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 product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"One thing that we are doing a lot with the solution, and it's very good, is orchestrating a lot of JMeter agents. This feature has helped us a lot because we can reuse other vendors' performance scripts that they have used with JMeter before."
"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"It is feature-rich. It supports most protocols, which is important because I am in charge of a team at the bank, and we do performance testing for all kinds of different applications. We have tons of them. We even do video streams."
"The beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the Vuser license; it allows us to reduce the cost as per requirement."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."
"One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"The product must provide agents to monitor servers."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2. 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 OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Perfecto and BrowserStack, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and OpenText UFT One. See our BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load 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.
