BlazeMeter Reviews

I work in a bank where we use BlazeMeter to conduct our load testing or performance testing. In our company, we utilize multiple machines, and multiple projects are hosted on BlazeMeter.

The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare. The response time and the calls we make in our company are easy to trace with the help of BlazeMeter.

There is a tab in Blazemeter named Request Stats Report where improvements are required. If I have to go and find a particular timeline, which might be in a 15 or 20-minute window, there are no places or options where I can enter the perfect or exact timelines I want to find. You have the pointers to drag from one place to another, but that doesn't give me much freedom to get or find a timeline. Basically, on a tab in Blazemeter named Request Stats Report, there should be the start time and end time. In BlazeMeter's Request Stats Report, users should have an option where they can select and manually enter the test start and test end time to get the stats for a particular time period.

Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required.

I have been using BlazeMeter for a year.

The load testing time in BlazeMeter is too high since, in our company, we have seen that it takes four to five minutes to do an entire load testing process, and after that, we run the tests, which is a big problem for us.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

I see certain limitations when it comes to the scalability part of BlazeMeter since, in our company, we have faced multiple interruptions, because of which we had to stop certain testing processes.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

I cannot give you an exact number related to the number of users of BlazeMeter in our company since we are just one of the teams in the company that uses the tool. I believe that around 150 to 200 people in my company use BlazeMeter.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I only have experience with BlazeMeter.

I rate the product's initial setup around seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is a difficult setup, and ten is an easy setup.

The time taken for the deployment of BlazeMeter varies since we have multiple types of applications in our company. If I have to deploy something on BlazeMeter, the time range for the deployment process can be somewhere between 30 to 120 minutes.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

BlazeMeter is a supportive tool in terms of the fact that it is easy to migrate from one system to another. BlazeMeter offers an easy infrastructure that allows for migration, if needed, in a well-organized manner, but it is not an optimized tool yet since I still see a lot of problems in it.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

We are using it to execute performance testing for our website and mobile applications, including e-commerce solutions, internet banking, and more.

Our applications are in a cloud environment and have a lot of users using them at the same time. We are looking to create a better experience for the users. We execute this kind of performance setting to establish a baseline for response times and we use it to reduce them.

We are both a customer of BlazeMeter and a partner that implements it for other customers.

It helps us to work faster when doing performance testing. Because we're faster, we can better use our resources. We have more capacity for our backlog.

We have better visibility into test metrics by managing the reports and dashboards that present the results of test execution. That helps us to evaluate the performance parameters that the application should achieve. It has been great seeing the results that we are achieving.

It has definitely helped us to implement shift-left testing. By doing performance tests faster and earlier in the process, we have the opportunity to prevent performance issues in production. That aspect is very good.

In addition, the Scriptless Testing functionality means we can build a performance testing team in which some members don't need to have extreme programming or development experience. We can create a mixed team that has professionals with great expertise and less experienced people so that we can prepare them for the future.

Another benefit is the ability to build test data on-the-fly. That helps us increase test coverage. It's one of the main functionalities that helps us with that. It has also decreased our test cycle times by almost 35 percent, but I do believe that it could be even more than that.

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.

It can also be used for both performance and functional testing of any application and we can manage different kinds of data to better cover the performance and functional testing of the applications. For example, if we need different kinds of data to test the different uses of an application, we can use this platform to help us with that. 

Another thing we like is that while it's difficult sometimes to connect this kind of performance test solution with application performance monitoring solutions, BlazeMeter has been great. Our experience with that has been great.

BlazeMeter is the perfect tool for us because it works with cloud and open source and other vendors' solutions. It's very good with other testing solutions in both our and our customers' ecosystems. For example, it's very good for perfecting mobile solutions and with other test data management solutions. It's very easy to integrate it into the software testing processes and tools that our customers are using.

It's also very good at bridging Agile and CoE teams. One thing that we are exploring right now, to make sure it works correctly, is the integration of BlazeMeter in the continuous integration and continuous delivery journey.

I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on.

I have been using BlazeMeter for three to four years.

I don't recall having any issues with its stability. I'm extremely satisfied with that.

The scalability is great. We can have a lot of virtual users when we need them.

We use BlazeMeter in different environments because we have customers with on-prem and cloud solutions.

I'm very happy with the technical support. They have answered all our needs.

Positive

We went with BlazeMeter because we can easily access the platform through the internet and because it is very easy to incorporate it into our processes.

The return on investment is guaranteed with BlazeMeter. If you only look at the price, you will only see one side of the financial equation. We like to evaluate the return on investment in terms of reduced testing time, increased productivity, and the ability to deliver many more features into production with BlazeMeter.

I've worked with other performance testing, service virtualization, and test data management solutions. I have been working in the software testing area since 2000.

People love using JMeter, which is an open-source solution, but I prefer BlazeMeter because we can easily orchestrate a lot of testing. It has additional features that help make our performance and non-functional-requirements testing better, because we can integrate it with functional testing. And there are service virtualization and test data management features in the same solution. In a good number of cases, we only need BlazeMeter to do many things, rather than using two or three tools to do the same job. It's a single workplace where we can do many things.

My advice would be not to look only at the price as the only point of decision. Evaluate if the tool is a good fit with your business and challenges.

We are using the SaaS solution. For companies that want to start, it's a better approach because it's easy to use: Pay and go. Of course, in large accounts, we are facing companies that are looking not only for cloud and private cloud, but for hybrid solutions where it is installed on-premises and in the cloud. BlazeMeter is up to this kind of challenge.

Adoption is a challenge that we face with every new tool or process. Because BlazeMeter is easy to use, we can adopt it faster. For developers and Agile teams, it's very helpful when we can use something quickly. That has helped a lot in the adoption.

The level of maintenance is okay. It is nothing that would create barriers for us. We have a team of eight people involved in the solution, and their roles include administration and performance testing.

Blazemeter is one of the top-three that I have found. It doesn't have any negative points compared to others.

We use the platform for performance and load testing to ensure our applications can handle varying traffic levels.

The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based nature, which allows us to conduct tests without relying on local resources.

Additionally, linking reports with Slack for notifications has greatly benefited our team’s communication.

The product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics.

I have been using BlazeMeter for about two weeks. 

The product is stable. 

Our entire platform is on the Google Cloud Platform (GCP), and BlazeMeter’s ability to handle various load requirements seamlessly has been beneficial.

We have used JMeter and Gatling in the past.

The platform was easy to configure and integrate into our existing pipelines.

We implemented the platform with the help of our in-house DevOps team. 

The product pricing is reasonable. 

I recommend BlazeMeter for its ease of setup and integration into continuous testing pipelines.

I rate it a nine out of ten. 

We use the solution for performance testing. We create the safe to upload to BlazeMeter. Also, we can do standalone and combined load tests depending on the requirements.

BlazeMeter is quite fast and can be accessed through the web browser.

We sometimes experience downtime, but not so frequently.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.

Customer support is fast.

Positive

We opted for BlazeMeter because it is accessible through the web browser.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Multiple people can focus on the same instance. If anyone wants to view the result, So it's quite easy. You don't need to share the GTL file. You can access the browser.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

To load performance testing of web/mobile apps.

WIP.

• Simplicity
• Easy integration of open source tools
• Moderate migration of ALM scripts.

Reporting.

I really like the ability to spin up as many load generators as I need, and get statistics on response times and the load generators themselves. BlazeMeter support and flexibility is also hugely valuable.

To accurately test load on a webserver it takes traffic (load) from multiple “load generators”.
A load generator is a machine running load testing software (like Jmeter).
Clearly, one couldn’t accurately test 10 load balanced webservers with traffic from a standard desktop.
If one did and saw performance issues, the most likely source would be the desktop doing the testing, or the connection.
If no performance issues were seen it could be that the desktop was not able to emulate the specified load.

One blind spot of Jmeter is it does not tell the user how many threads their machine can handle. Users need to know how to monitor. Most users don’t, and set the threads higher than the machine can handle.
Blazemeter:

- Handles all that complication and makes using Jmeter simple

- Has expert staff that can point you in the right direction if your tests are not working

- Allows users to select how many load generators (machines running Jmeter) will be used during a given test.

o There are a few different contract options (1 server, 5 servers)

o Custom contracts for any number of servers you need. I really appreciate their flexibility on the contracts.

Building an in-house group of load generation JMeter servers to load test usually takes time and effort. BlazeMeter makes all that simple.

I have used JMeter for 4 years and BlazeMeter on and off for 2 to 3 years.

There were some minor issues with stability.

We did not encounter any issues here. Scalability is one of the wonderful parts of working with BlazeMeter.

Technical support has been great.

I’ve used JMeter from several load generator servers I set up to work together.

Initial setup was easy.

If you don’t see the option you need, just ask them. You’ll be able to get a custom contract. It is not free, but it is a fantastic deal compared to anything else out there.

Most recently I have been using a custom contract with Blazemeter rather than a standard month to month contract. That allows me to pay by test hours times servers used. So I can spin up as many load generators as I need. The statistics on response times and the load generators themselves are standard Blazemeter features available to anyone with a contract. BlazeMeter support has several times helped me figure out what was going on with my tests, that saved me a chunk of time. It's always nice to have some insight from a true Jmeter expert.

We considered setting up our own set of load generation JMeter servers. We also looked at HPE LoadRunner and SoapUI.

BlazeMeter is an easy way to get really accurate results from JMeters that you already have without having to build a set of networked JMeters (e.g., one with the UI running a bunch GUI-less slave machines).

I mainly use BlazeMeter for scripting. I have a performance testing background, and can directly record my workload with the help of a BlazeMeter plugin. Once I've recorded I can modify a couple of enhancements. I can design my signature in BlazeMeter and choose multiple dedicated IPs, depending on our load. We are system integrators and I'm a senior engineer. 

Providing the Cloud load generator is a good feature. We can run executions from multiple locations. Very few tools provide that. They have recently started with separate API testing. I haven't had a chance to use that yet but it might be very helpful. The solution offers flexibility with its configurations, taking around two to five minutes each. You can see the metrics in a graphical view while running the tests. Response times are also visible and can filter whatever we need and get the results of error loads. 

Documentation for the solution could be improved because there are some areas, such as licensing costs, where there is a lack of information regarding structure. I'd also like the ability to see a comparison feature after carrying out several tests. I'd like to know the difference in terms of response times and other details. That would be a great feature for them to provide. 

Sometimes we'd like to include additional users during a test run to check application sustainability. We can do it from a scripting end but it would be great if BlazeMeter would provide the option of adding a few more users while running a test.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The stability is good. 

The scalability is good. 

If there are issues I update it in a chat and the technical support creates a ticket ID for follow-up. Sometimes they respond very quickly and other times they are very slow at resolving the issue. Response times are inconsistent. 

The initial setup is relatively straightforward and user-friendly. We have less than 50 users, we don't do any load tests.

I recommend BlazeMeter because of the accuracy of the results. 

I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

• The ability to quickly scale out a load test across the world, just to simulate realistic world traffic conditions.

For us in particular, we're a product that gets heavily used during the election season. We've always had trouble handling this burst in the past, so this past year, I've started using BlazeMeter at this company. We took from January to July using BlazeMeter to really model out what the traffic looked like in previous years and to be able to handle the load when November came and it went through just fine without a glitch.

At the moment, it's heavily based on putting a load on systems through API endpoints/HTTP endpoints. There is a lot of existing tooling out there in organizations that deal with a Selenium-based test and they only have a Selenium web driver option right now, which is not the nicest thing to use. Organizations currently have Selenium tests written and, like us for example, a huge suite in Java. It would be nice to be able to just throw them in there.

I’ve been using BlazeMeter for about four years.

This is a cloud-based solution. I've never really had any trouble with it.

We have not had scalability issues for our needs. We're talking about scaling stuff out to hundreds of thousands of requests per second and those in turn generate a lot more traffic internally. So with whatever we use, it's perfectly fine.

We did not use technical support.

We didn't have a previous solution. I personally came to this company in the past year and a half. I've always used BlazeMeter at my other companies and there was a big, gaping hole here. They were doing everything manually with running JMeter tests and this was just a natural fit.

For this audience, if you know JMeter, everything is pretty straightforward. You just sign up and upload your test. As far as support goes, if you do run into stuff, they have a little button on the side that lets you chat with them.

This is all in-house.

That's tough to calculate, but I can tell you that BlazeMeter helped increase quality-of-service (QoS) which in turn leads to customers having a positive experience with the product. That, of course, leads to less churn which is a good thing.

The pricing works. They're flexible. They work with you.

There was LoadStorm, loader.io, and blitz.io.

Definitely ask your engineering staff if they're familiar with JMeter. If they're not, it would be good to get a quick two-hour tutorial on it and then BlazeMeter will make a lot more sense.