We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and k6 Open Source based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Load Testing Tools."The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that BlazeMeter provides easy access to its users while also ensuring that its reporting functionalities are good."
"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 product's initial setup phase was simple."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"For me, the best part is that we can graphically see the test result at runtime. It helps us understand the behavior of the application during all stages of the test."
"The tool's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process."
"The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"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."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Load Testing Tools with 41 reviews while k6 Open Source is ranked 17th in Load Testing Tools with 2 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while k6 Open Source is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of k6 Open Source writes "Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and SmartBear LoadNinja, whereas k6 Open Source is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad and RadView WebLOAD.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.