Akamai CloudTest vs BlazeMeter comparison

Akamai and Perforce are both solutions in the Performance Testing Tools category. Akamai is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0, while Perforce is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.0. Akamai holds a 2.3% mindshare in PTT, compared to Perforce’s 14.6% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Akamai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of Perforce users who would recommend it.

Akamai CloudTest

Read 7 Akamai CloudTest reviews

532 Views
391 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

BlazeMeter

Read 48 BlazeMeter reviews

4,971 Views
2,864 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Akamai CloudTest

BlazeMeter

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 2025

Akamai CloudTest and BlazeMeter compete in the performance testing space. BlazeMeter holds the advantage with its comprehensive feature set that many tech buyers find worth the investment, despite Akamai CloudTest's favorable pricing and support.

Features: Akamai CloudTest provides real-time analytics, easy scalability, and live monitoring, beneficial for enterprises needing immediate performance insights. BlazeMeter offers open-source compatibility, broad testing protocol support, and cloud-based load generation, ideal for diverse testing environments.

Room for Improvement: Akamai CloudTest could enhance integration with other performance tools, improve customizability of analytics, and streamline its user interface for better navigation. BlazeMeter might improve support response times, optimize on-premise integration for larger enterprises, and simplify initial setup procedures.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Akamai CloudTest offers straightforward deployment with dedicated support channels, facilitating smooth implementation. BlazeMeter's cloud-based deployment provides flexibility, though support response times may vary, yet is favored for its adaptability.

Pricing and ROI: Akamai CloudTest typically offers lower setup costs with potential for quick ROI for businesses controlling expenditures. BlazeMeter reflects its extensive capabilities in its pricing, offering long-term value for those prioritizing robust testing features, and provides superior ROI due to its comprehensive offerings.

To learn more, read our detailed Akamai CloudTest vs. BlazeMeter Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest vs. BlazeMeter

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 842,296 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Akamai CloudTest

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

9th

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

8th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

BlazeMeter

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

3rd

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

3rd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Akamai CloudTest is 2.3%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlazeMeter is 14.6%, up from 14.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Performance Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Vinod Patil

Senior Manager - Performance Architect at Publicis Sapient

Is user-friendly and offers live monitoring

Extending the same cloud tool to make it app native so that it can help with device performance testing towards HTTP requests and responses. If you can have a front-end tool like Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. If you have some integration with Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. I want the tool to have IP spoofing because whenever you do load testing, you will have a little bit of static IP based on a particular load generator. If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement. Having integration to APM tools, like Dynatrace or AppDynamics, the way we have in the load tools, would be good.

Read full review

Bala Maddu

Mobile Network Automation Architect at BT - British Telecom

Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases

Overall, it's helped our ability to address test data challenges. The test data features on their own are very good, but version control test data isn't included yet. I think that's an area for improvement. We can update the test data on the cloud. That's a good feature. There's also test data management, which is good. [Runscope] doesn't have the test data management yet. Mock services do, and performance testing has it. We can do the same test through JMeter, validating the same criteria, but the feedback from [Runscope] is quite visible. We can see the request and the response, what data comes back, and add the validation criteria. We can manage the test environments and test data, but running the same API request for multiple test data is missing. We cloned the test cases multiple times to run it. They need to work on that. 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. In the future, I would like to see integrations with GitLab and external Git reports so we could have some sort of version control outside as well. There is no current mechanism for that. The ability to have direct imports of spoken API specifications instead of converting them to JSON would be nice. There are some features they could work on.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool is very user-friendly, so you can save a lot of time in terms of your preparation activities."

"The solution is very stable."

"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."

"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."

"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."

"It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds the on-premises hosting solutions, so we have implemented a hybrid approach. BlazeMeter sets us up for our traditional hosting platforms and application stack as well as the modern cloud-based or SaaS-based application technologies."

"The stability is good."

"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."

"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."

"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."

"The orchestration feature is the most valuable. It's like the tourist backend component of BlazeMeter. It allows me to essentially give BlazeMeter multiple JMeter scripts and a YAML file, and it will orchestrate and execute that load test and all those scripts as I define them."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."

"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."

More BlazeMeter pros

Cons

"The test clip should be more user-friendly."

"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."

"If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement."

"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."

"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."

"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."

"I don't think I can generate a JMX file unless I run JMeter, which is one of my concerns when it comes to BlazeMeter."

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

"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."

"BlazeMeter needs more granular access control. Currently, BlazeMeter controls everything at a workspace level, so a user can view or modify anything inside that workspace depending on their role. It would be nice if there was a more granular control where you could say, "This person can only do A, B, and C," or, "This user only has access to functional testing. This user only has access to mock services." That feature set doesn't currently exist."

"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."

"BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for."

"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."

More BlazeMeter cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."

"The tool's price is at an intermediate level. When you compare it with other enterprise load testing tools, it falls under the average category."

"Running cost is very low."

"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."

"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."

"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."

"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."

"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."

"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."

"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."

"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."

More BlazeMeter pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Akamai CloudTest?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Akamai CloudTest?

I use the solution in my company for load testing. You can say that it is used on the API and then for web page-level load testing.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Akamai CloudTest?

The tool's very first benefit is zero maintenance. You need not take care of your controller or load generator, so there is zero maintenance. The second benefit of the tool would be in the area of ...

See all answers

How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?

Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and performance testing, enabling users to monitor and test public and private APIs. We ...

See all answers

What do you like most about BlazeMeter?

It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BlazeMeter?

BlazeMeter requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 42% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 20% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 12% of the time

More Akamai CloudTest Competitors

Apache JMeter vs BlazeMeter

Compared 60% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs BlazeMeter

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs BlazeMeter

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs BlazeMeter

Compared 3% of the time

Perfecto vs BlazeMeter

Compared 2% of the time

More BlazeMeter Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest

March 2025

Download Akamai CloudTest product report

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter

March 2025

Download BlazeMeter product report

Also Known As

SOASTA CloudTest

JMeter Cloud

Overview

Soasta's CloudTest rapidly builds realistic test scenarios using real user data, then tests, analyzes and repairs faster. CloudTest's visual test environment and real-time analytics test your website, mobile app and api backend to give you a streaming view of all your performance data while tests run from back-end systems to front end performance.

Akamai

BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery.

The rapidly growing BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.

Perforce

Sample Customers

Chester Zoo

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest vs. BlazeMeter

February 2025

Free Report: Akamai CloudTest vs. BlazeMeter

Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai CloudTest vs. BlazeMeter and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Akamai CloudTest vs. BlazeMeter 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.