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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.4
BlazeMeter improved service quality, reduced churn, and enhanced productivity through integration, automation, and cost-efficient testing solutions.
Sentiment score
7.2
Organizations achieve 70% ROI improvement by expanding OpenText UFT Developer users, reducing costs, and enhancing test automation efficiency.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
BlazeMeter support is praised for knowledgeable assistance, quick resolutions, and a global team, though response times vary.
Sentiment score
5.7
OpenText UFT Developer users report mixed support experiences, citing responsive technical help but inconsistent communication and slow response times.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
BlazeMeter excels in cloud-based scalability and flexibility, with minor setup challenges but effective load distribution and user-friendliness.
Sentiment score
6.7
OpenText UFT Developer excels in scalability and integration across platforms, despite some licensing cost and script development challenges.
BlazeMeter has the capability to simulate a higher number of users compared to JMeter standalone.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
BlazeMeter is generally stable with minimal issues, reliable availability, swift bug resolution, and appreciated cloud-based infrastructure.
Sentiment score
6.8
OpenText UFT Developer's stability is mixed; recent updates help, but it remains less reliable than alternatives like Selenium.
 

Room For Improvement

Users desire improved pricing, efficiency, integration, documentation, reporting, customization, access control, and enhanced support for testing and setup.
OpenText UFT Developer needs performance, compatibility, and interface improvements while offering scriptless automation to increase adoption.
The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use.
 

Setup Cost

BlazeMeter offers flexible pricing, including pay-as-you-go and annual fees, suitable for larger organizations but pricey for smaller ones.
OpenText UFT Developer is costly with flexible licensing models, primarily used by large enterprises due to its high expense.
BlazeMeter requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.
 

Valuable Features

BlazeMeter offers scalable, user-friendly cloud-based performance testing with global capabilities and integration support, ideal for high-load tests.
OpenText UFT Developer excels with multi-language support, seamless integration, and AI recognition, enhancing test automation and productivity.
BlazeMeter offers a higher limit on load simulation compared to standalone JMeter.
 

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd), Load Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th)
OpenText UFT Developer
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
13th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
13th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.6%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional 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.
Mohamed Bosri - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient recording feature shines amid expected desktop and website enhancements
Our use case involves functionality for a system ERP. We work with Deviation, which is stable and receives positive feedback from users OpenText UFT Developer allows junior testers to learn through open source and online resources like YouTube. They can find solutions to issues even if the…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
16%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

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 requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?
There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
It's a high-priced solution compared to Selenium. Selenium is free, though there is a paid version now too. Selenium has improved a lot, and it's still okay to use. It's a functional testing tool, ...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?
The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites. It is also suggested that the design and some functionality could be better.
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. OpenText UFT Developer and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.