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 2.5% mindshare in PTT, compared to Perforce’s 14.0% 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

513 Views
371 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

BlazeMeter

Read 48 BlazeMeter reviews

4,784 Views
2,729 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 845,040 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 (8th), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Akamai CloudTest is 2.5%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlazeMeter is 14.0%, down from 15.0% 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 level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."

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

"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."

"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."

"The solution is very stable."

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

"One key advantage of using BlazeMeter is that it does not require me to manage my own infrastructure."

"With the help of the Mock Services, we are overcoming everything. Wherever we are facing issues, whether they will be long term or temporary, by implementing the Mock Services we can bypass the faulty components that are not needed for our particular testing."

"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."

"The product's initial setup phase was simple."

"The solution’s most valuable feature is the dashboard."

"There is a repository of all the scripts that we have created. You can go back and compare tests to see what the tests looked like. If I want to go and compare something with whatever happened six months or one year back, I can do that."

"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."

More BlazeMeter pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

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

"The reporting capabilities could be improved."

"The tool fails to offer better parameterization to allow it to run the same script across different environments, making it a feature that needs a little improvement."

"One problem, while we are executing a test, is that it will take some time to download data. Let's say I'm performance testing with a high-end load configuration. It takes a minimum of three minutes or so to start the test itself. That's the bad part of the performance testing... every time I rerun the same test, it is downloaded again... That means I have to wait for three to four minutes again."

"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."

"The scalability features still need improvement."

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

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."

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

"It is an averagely priced product."

"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."

"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."

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

"The solution is free and open source."

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

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Insurance Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

17%

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 39% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 20% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 16% 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 56% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs BlazeMeter

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs BlazeMeter

Compared 12% of the time

k6 Open Source vs BlazeMeter

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) 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

845,040 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.