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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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 Enterprise
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
83
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 Enterprise is 6.3%, down from 8.5% 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.
VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The user interface is good."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"One thing that we are doing a lot with the solution, and it's very good, is orchestrating a lot of JMeter agents. This feature has helped us a lot because we can reuse other vendors' performance scripts that they have used with JMeter before."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"With the help of the Mock Services, we are overcoming everything. Wherever we are facing issues, whether they will be long term or temporary, by implementing the Mock Services we can bypass the faulty components that are not needed for our particular testing."
"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 solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
"The solution is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"LoadRunner's UI is project-convenient, allowing easier simulation of real-time scenarios and producing comprehensive reports that are effortless to read."
"It offers easy integration with third-party tools like Dynatrace, Splunk, etc."
"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
 

Cons

"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."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"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 product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics."
"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."
"BlazeMeter does not provide integration with the Aternity tool."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"Third-party product integrations could be a little more slickly handled."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is an averagely priced product."
"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."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
"The solution is free and open source."
"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."
"The solution should decrease its price."
"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
"I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten."
"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."
"For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,168 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
22%
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
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.
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
824,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.