Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BlazeMeter vs IBM Rational Test Workbench comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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
3rd
Ranking in API Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (8th), Load Testing Tools (3rd)
IBM Rational Test Workbench
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
19th
Ranking in API Testing Tools
15th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
36th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 14.0%, down from 15.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Bala Maddu - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
reviewer1513668 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"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."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"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."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"The feature that stands out the most is their action groups. They act like functions or methods and code, allowing us to reuse portions of our tests. That also means we have a single point for maintenance when updates are required. Instead of updating a hundred different test cases, we update one action group, and the test cases using that action group will update."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
 

Cons

"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."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"The product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"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."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"Sometimes, when we execute tests, the results calculated by BlazeMeter, specifically the response times for failed transactions, are incorrect."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"The solution is free and open source."
"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"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."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
16%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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 do you like most about BlazeMeter?
It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.
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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. IBM Rational Test Workbench and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
845,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.