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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 15.9%, up from 13.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is 8.6%, down from 9.8% 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.
AlexLogan - PeerSpot reviewer
Has realistic scenario composition for performance tests and is highly scalable, but the user interface needs improvement
The solution generates traffic on the infrastructure, which resembles end users. Depending on the performance of the underlying infrastructure and nodes of the architecture, our company team can report on the scalability of applications. The solution performs two types of tests: user interface testing, which is implemented primarily in our organization for online banking, and the other one is API level testing for mobile banking. In terms of the feature set, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is a market-leading application that has been around for 20 years. I have been working with the solution throughout the acquisition stages; the product used to be much better when it was primarily managed by Mercury. There are limited AI capabilities in the solution; when I was personally operating some smart scenarios using the feature of auto-scaling, I found it unsatisfying. I would recommend the product to others based on its feature set and the level of support. I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as seven out of ten. There are no glaring weaknesses in the product, and it's good enough for its core purpose.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"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."
"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."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"It is focused on concurrency testing, which has been especially beneficial for us. Their previous experiences had caused major setbacks."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."
"Keeping up with DevOps, thus the best feature of StormRunner is that we don't have to build and maintain infrastructure anymore."
"The beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"The solution can scale."
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
 

Cons

"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."
"The support could be better."
"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."
"Some improvements can be made to the solution's user interface"
"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"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."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very 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 pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"The solution is free and open source."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."
"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
"Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
"It's a very expensive solution"
"It is neither costly nor cheap. It is not too high and not too low. I know the price of other tools, and LoadRunner Cloud's price is in the medium range."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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's pricing is competitive but can be negotiable.
Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
The pricing is high compared to other licensing tools like NeoLoad. It's not excessively expensive but higher than NeoLoad. However, in my experience, clients often weigh NeoLoad and LoadRunner equ...
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.