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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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 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 (6th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 15.5%, up from 14.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is 6.2%, down from 8.3% 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.
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

"It is a stable solution. When we compare BlazeMeter with other tools in the market, I can say that the solution's overall performance has also been very good in our company."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"It is focused on concurrency testing, which has been especially beneficial for us. Their previous experiences had caused major setbacks."
"The user interface is good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based nature, which allows us to conduct tests without relying on local resources."
"We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals."
"The user interface is fine."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"For me, LoadRunner stands out, especially with its reporting capabilities, the graphs that can be generated, and the unique feature of measuring our application's response alongside our infrastructure metrics, such as CPU, memory, or disk usage, all presented in graph form. This is something other applications struggle to match."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"It is pretty easy to do test execution and results analysis. When it comes to scenario settings, LoadRunner Enterprise has an extra edge over other testing tools in the industry. The scenario setup is easy, and in terms of execution, we have a clear idea of what is happening"
"This product is better oriented to large, enterprise-oriented organizations."
 

Cons

"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"I don't think I can generate a JMX file unless I run JMeter, which is one of my concerns when it comes to BlazeMeter."
"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."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"The support could be better."
"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."
"Sometimes, when we execute tests, the results calculated by BlazeMeter, specifically the response times for failed transactions, are incorrect."
"BlazeMeter does not provide integration with the Aternity tool."
"Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despite its advantages, leading them to alternatives like JMeter and RPT."
"After they get over the acquisition, the first improvement is going to be tailoring it for their existing stack of other products. How would LoadRunner work for Documentum? How would it work for Business Network? How would it work for other apps? They can have a pre-package or a guide because they are all in the same family as opposed to being outside."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"The technical support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
"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 licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"We used the Professional version and then moved to the enterprise version. We have subscribed to 1000 user licenses. The tool will be super expensive if we take up 5,000 user licenses. We have to limit ourselves on testing."
"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."
"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."
"This solution can be expensive."
"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
"ROI is 200%."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
831,615 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
 

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
 

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: January 2025.
831,615 professionals have used our research since 2012.