We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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 baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"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 solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"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 most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"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."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"We can book load generators."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"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."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"Third-party product integrations could be a little more slickly handled."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"The solution is expensive."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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 OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter. See our BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
