We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"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."
"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."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"The stability is good."
"The Worksoft Capture feature is most valuable. For example, if you are creating a sales order in SAP, you do not need to go to each field and do everything. You do not need to write code for each and every line. You can just turn on the Worksoft Capture feature and manually perform your actions. It will capture all manual actions, and it will give you the steps. It will write the steps for you."
"It provides a lot of time savings. We are always ready to execute a task whenever the business asks us. We saved approximately 7000 hours in 2018."
"It's very different versus other tools in the past, which were not very modern. It easy for people to automate."
"It is a huge improvement, as it recognizes complex general applications, where most tools won't recognize the objects within them."
"The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all."
"Mostly in the area of project testing, the most immediate benefit is when you historically have manual testers do a certain job, and a full regression testing was previously done 100 percent manually. We have had cases where the release testing for an entire region would take around 12 weeks. With Worksoft, we are now down to two to three weeks. So, that is one use case where we have had success."
"Automation using Worksoft Certify has saved our testing times by 40% to 50%."
"Certify's web UI testing abilities for testing of modern applications like SAP Fiori was good when we started and they developed it to be even better. We all know that web applications can change objects in DOM quite fast and it breaks tests. To counter it Certify has made object recognition more flexible and generic, so we don't have any troubles."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"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."
"Reportings are not user-friendly."
"I would like the GUI to be more user-friendly and intuitive. We want to be able to move assets from project to another project without having to be in the same project or the same folder structure."
"The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation."
"As part of our weekly regression, we wanted to use Execution Manager. However, from 2017 until March 2021, Execution Manager was not working as expected in our enrollment. It could have been better. If Execution Manager had worked well, then we could have doubled our productivity. Unfortunately, it had problems."
"There was a change to Capture 2.0. In the end, there have been some challenges with the newer version. Therefore, the company testers, the local ones, do not want to use Capture 2.0."
"We can't get the process intelligence module to work properly. We can't get the impact comment that analyzes the incoming development code to run, either. We've also had bugs in the CTM and execution manager in the past year. It took technical support a long time to resolve this issue. We escalated it so that the vice president of the company was included as well."
"Technical support's first response to us is usually late."
"Worksoft Certify's tech support's response time could be improved."
BlazeMeter is ranked 9th in Functional Testing Tools with 41 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 64 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. 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 Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Perfecto, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Panaya Test Dynamix. See our BlazeMeter vs. Worksoft Certify report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation 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.
