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

BlazeMeter vs k6 Open Source comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 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 Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd), Functional Testing Tools (8th), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
k6 Open Source
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 14.0%, down from 15.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of k6 Open Source is 3.7%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load 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.
NalinGoonawardana - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services
One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter. While k6 is a powerful tool for performance testing, it leans heavily towards coding. Having a GUI, even if it is a low-code approach, could make it more accessible to a broader audience. It would be beneficial to strike a balance where basic tasks can be performed graphically through a user-friendly interface, while still allowing the flexibility for more complex operations through code, similar to how JMeter operates. This could enhance the user experience and make k6 more approachable for those who may not be as comfortable with scripting.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"I really like the recording because when I use the JMeter the scripting a lot of recording it takes me a lot of time to get used to. The BlazeMeter the recording is quick."
"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."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"The user interface is good."
"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."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"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."
 

Cons

"BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for."
"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."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"My only complaint is about the technical support, where sometimes I found that they would not read into and understand the details of my question before answering it."
"The pricing is high"
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
 

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."
"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."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"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 product pricing is reasonable."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Media Company
8%
 

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.
What do you like most about k6 Open Source?
The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing.
What needs improvement with k6 Open Source?
One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter. While k6 is a powerful tool for performance testing, it leans heavily towards coding. Having a GUI, even if it is a low-co...
What is your primary use case for k6 Open Source?
k6 Open Source is a powerful tool, especially for API-level performance testing. Its integration capabilities and ease of use make it promising for a wider audience.
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Load Impact
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
rackspace, salesforce.com, IBM, servicenow, Nasdaq, JWT
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. k6 Open Source and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.