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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Silk Performer comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Functional Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
OpenText Silk Performer
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 15.7%, up from 13.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Performer is 0.9%, down from 1.9% 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.
SR
Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy
In terms of areas of improvement, I would say the Silk Performance Explorer tool, which is used for monitoring and analysis, can be improved because that's where we spend most of our time when we're analyzing the test data. Any enhancements that can be provided in the monitoring sphere would be useful. When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test. The interface for the scripting could be more feature-rich. Integration with tools like Prometheus or Grafana where we can visualize the data would be great. As things stand, we have to use one monitoring tool to visualize data and another for visualizing the test metrics. Integration would enable us to see the metrics from Silk and correlate that with the metrics from other servers or other processes we're monitoring. It would save having to look at Silk data and server metrics separately. It's the way things are going with newer tools. I think the solution is being phased out by Micro Focus and their emphasis is focused more on LoadRunner. We haven't seen much development in the last few years.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable aspect of BlazeMeter is its user-friendly nature, ability to conduct distributed load testing and comprehensive analysis and reporting features. It particularly excels in providing a clear and organized view of load test results."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds the on-premises hosting solutions, so we have implemented a hybrid approach. BlazeMeter sets us up for our traditional hosting platforms and application stack as well as the modern cloud-based or SaaS-based application technologies."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"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."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
 

Cons

"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"Sometimes, when we execute tests, the results calculated by BlazeMeter, specifically the response times for failed transactions, are incorrect."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"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."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"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."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."
"The solution is free and open source."
"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load 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
26%
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
7%
Insurance Company
6%
 

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's pricing is competitive but can be negotiable.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus Silk Performer, Silk Performer
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
University of Colorado, Medidata, Monash University
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Load Testing Tools. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.