We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Telerik Test Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"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."
"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."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"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 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."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"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."
"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Load Testing Tools with 41 reviews while Telerik Test Studio is ranked 14th in Load Testing Tools with 5 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Telerik Test Studio is rated 8.0. 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 Telerik Test Studio writes "Very good performance and load testing capabilities". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas Telerik Test Studio is most compared with Selenium HQ, Ranorex Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, Katalon Studio and Tricentis Tosca. See our BlazeMeter vs. Telerik Test Studio report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.
