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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs SmartBear LoadNinja comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 9.0%, down from 16.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.8%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 2.1%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BlazeMeter9.0%
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)5.8%
SmartBear LoadNinja2.1%
Other83.1%
Performance 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.
VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
Kapil Tarka - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support
It's a new tool when I compare it with LoadViewer and HP LoadRunner. It needs time to mature. For example, it needs to improve concurrency. When you run a test suite, your scripts will generate some test data. If we are running a banking application and then we are running a full end-to-end suite, there are many actions that need testing. There's a lot of data getting generated. There should be a variable that we can store for later in our later test cases. We need data management and dynamic data generation to be able to capture the data which is generated.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"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."
"There is a repository of all the scripts that we have created. You can go back and compare tests to see what the tests looked like. If I want to go and compare something with whatever happened six months or one year back, I can do that."
"BlazeMeter has provided me with a vast cloud platform to run JMeter script files, eliminating the need for storage or load providers."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"The product is good, and the concept is good as well."
"We haven't had an outage since we started using the solution."
"​Probably its prime advantage, it provides a centralized location for testing."
"The user interface is fine."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"Our main use case for the product was load and stress testing. It helped us put the system under stress by injecting in multiple users, such as 5,000 users."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
 

Cons

"BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"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."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"BlazeMeter does not provide integration with the Aternity tool."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"The scalability features still need improvement."
"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."
"The technical support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Lacks the option of carrying out transaction comparisons."
"The debugging feature needs to include graphs."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward."
"It needs time to mature."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"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 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."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"I rate the product's price two on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive. The solution is not expensive."
"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."
"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"I give the cost a one out of ten."
"There is an ROI. What LoadRunner does, is it prevents failures when there are many, many concurrent users in the systems of a company."
"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."
"For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"We used the Professional version and then moved to the enterprise version. We have subscribed to 1000 user licenses. The tool will be super expensive if we take up 5,000 user licenses. We have to limit ourselves on testing."
"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
23%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise22
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise74
No data available
 

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 perfo...
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 bas...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration in...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
The price of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), including pricing, licensing, and s...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
The analytics and reporting features can be improved, though they are good enough. If you have expertise, you can man...
What do you like most about SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement.
What needs improvement with SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja presented issues around some use cases that we wanted to do. We were using the solution to simula...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear LoadComplete?
For API, we were previously using JMeter, which is an open-source solution. Overall, I rate SmartBear LoadNinja a sev...
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
SmartBear LoadComplete
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Falafel Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: September 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.