No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BlazeMeter vs Eggplant Performance comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 5, 2025

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

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (9th), Load Testing Tools (4th), API Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (7th)
Eggplant Performance
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 5.9%, down from 14.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Eggplant Performance is 2.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BlazeMeter5.9%
Eggplant Performance2.5%
Other91.6%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

NP
Software Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Performance testing for peak retail events has become faster and delivers reliable user load insights
BlazeMeter offers numerous features, but the ones that stand out to me include its ease of use, predefined configurations for high-scale performance testing that can be executed quickly, AI-powered testing, scriptless testing, and accurate API testing with an auto-correction plugin to ensure the accuracy of the tests performed. While I cannot pinpoint a single favorite feature, I find myself using parallel execution frequently because this feature allows multiple tests to be run at once, greatly enhancing my workflow. BlazeMeter effectively handles dependency in microservice architecture, for example, linking one API to another to manage response flows, such as the login and registration APIs, which flows efficiently through BlazeMeter. BlazeMeter has positively impacted my organization by reducing the time required for testing due to its robust features that yield efficient results. Unlike JMeter, which has limitations on user simulations, BlazeMeter allows me to test any number of users, helping my e-commerce website manage unpredictable traffic loads effectively while delivering accurate results I can trust to improve my systems.
Shyam_Prasad - PeerSpot reviewer
AVP - Testing & QA at Laminaar Aviation
Offers unique object identification, ideal for UI layer regression automation but limited scalability
Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used. Secondly, we have a very limited resource pool that uses this tool in India. So, finding resources familiar with Eggplant in India is challenging due to lack of affiliation programs and so on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"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."
"One key advantage of using BlazeMeter is that it does not require me to manage my own infrastructure."
"It is a stable solution. When we compare BlazeMeter with other tools in the market, I can say that the solution's overall performance has also been very good in our company."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"It helped to identify where there were problems, and then we could go investigate and figure out what was going on."
"I also evaluated JMeter and LoadRunner but I prefer BlazeMeter because of the speed and because it's easier to use."
"One key advantage of using BlazeMeter is that it does not require me to manage my own infrastructure."
"Customer Service: Excellent and very personal."
"It is not a conventional test automation tool. It uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify objects. It makes it the best in the class."
"It's been a revelation to us in terms of its ability to assist us in exploratory testing and to integrate with our current model-driven architecture."
"We find the solution stable and scalable."
"We don't have a big team of people that can watch the dials and check that everything is okay. We're doing a lot of the monitoring of our website and our product at the side of the desk. We need a solution that does a lot for us, and that's what Eggplant does."
"We've been really fortunate in that we've had virtually zero downtime in all the time we've been using Eggplant."
 

Cons

"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"Sometimes they respond very quickly and other times they are very slow at resolving the issue. Response times are inconsistent."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"The Timeline Report panel has no customization options. One feature that I missed was not having a time filter, which I had in ELK. For example, there are only filter requests for a time of less than 5 seconds."
"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."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"I'd like to see the ability to integrate the user experience through device forms like AWS device forms or source labs."
"One area I can think of to improve is the usability of the reports that we get."
"Bugs occur fairly frequently, but they are very responsive in identifying them and scheduling them for fixes in future releases."
"I'd like to see the ability to integrate the user experience through device forms like AWS device forms or source labs."
"Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's price two on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive. The solution is not expensive."
"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."
"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"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."
"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"The pricing is competitive in India."
"Eggplant came out as the most competitive in terms of commercials (terms and conditions) which was positive. When we did the initial negotiations, Eggplant started at a price but they were open to negotiations and we did negotiate a discount. That was really important to us because it showed a level of commitment to us."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
892,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Energy/Utilities Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise23
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BlazeMeter?
Regarding pricing, it is favorable compared to other tools, providing good value. The licensing is flexible, with options for one or two-year terms based on user requirements, and BlazeMeter occasi...
What needs improvement with BlazeMeter?
BlazeMeter meets my needs very well, but an area for improvement would be the ability to execute multiple projects simultaneously. I often have several projects that require performance testing, an...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
TestPlant eggPlant Performance
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Cisco
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. Eggplant Performance and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
892,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.