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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Professional 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
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (6th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 16.5%, up from 13.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 12.3%, down from 15.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Bala Maddu - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 17, 2022
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.
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
Oct 20, 2023
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"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."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"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 solution’s most valuable feature is the dashboard."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"A very comprehensive tool that is good for performance testing."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
 

Cons

"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"
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"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."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive."
"There's a reporting part of the cloud that could be improved a little bit."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"Improvement wise, the pipeline should be enabled. It should be embedded as part of the tool itself rather than going with third-party tools. Monitoring should be more effective as well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is free and open source."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"LoadRunner Professional's licensing costs are on the higher side, apart from the Community Edition."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
"When you compare the cost of other tools such as NeoLoad and LoadNinja, the cost of LoadRunner is on the expensive side. As a result, we are currently considering going with NeoLoad."
"It is reasonable. We pay the cost, but we have everything. We have a big set of licenses for SAP and other applications. We have all kinds of licenses."
"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."
"LoadRunner is more expensive than some competing products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
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 Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive. The virtual table server feature should be reintroduced. Some AI capabilities should be added. There should be an '...
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.