BlazeMeter vs Qt Squish comparison

Perforce and Qt Group are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. Perforce is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.1, while Qt Group is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.5. Perforce holds a 0.4% mindshare in TAt, compared to Qt Group’s 2.8% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Perforce users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Qt Group users who would recommend it.

BlazeMeter

Read 46 BlazeMeter reviews

558 Views
316 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Qt Squish

Read 18 Qt Squish reviews

2,782 Views
1,443 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

BlazeMeter

Qt Squish

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Qt Squish based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed BlazeMeter vs. Qt Squish Report (Updated: July 2024).

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter vs. Qt Squish

July 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 801,394 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (4th), Functional Testing Tools (9th), Load Testing Tools (4th)

Qt Squish

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2024, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.4%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qt Squish is 2.8%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

Shivakumar_Gutte

Senior Manager at 360logica Software Testing Services

Feb 21, 2024

Facilitates load testing, particularly in scripting and designing scenarios that mimic real-world user behaviors

An area for improvement could be enhancing BlazeMeter's integration with automation scripts. It would be beneficial if BlazeMeter could support automation frameworks more effectively, including the use of Selenium scripts for both manual and automated load testing. Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options. A lot of products are coming out, and BlazeMeter pricing is a factor. For example, LoadStorm by Neustar is integrated with built-in APMs. It won't capture all server stats, but it will collect the minimum important aspects – CPU consumption, utilization rate, and how much a single server is being stressed. If BlazeMeter offered similar functionality, it would be fantastic.

Read full review

AnirbanSarkar

Head - Solution Management Group at Meteonic Innovation Pvt. Ltd.

Aug 21, 2023

Seamless functionality, plug-and-play installation, and highly reliable

There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package. The froglogic Squish solution is only handling GUI regression testing, this is its forte. However, a lot of clients are looking into performance testing associated with it. If a performance testing capability can be added as a part of it, this would bring great value. froglogic Squish has a code coverage solution and they have done a pretty good job on it. The penetration testing could be added as a separate module, this would be beneficial.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 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 extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."

"The stability is good."

"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."

"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."

"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."

"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."

More BlazeMeter pros

"The initial setup process is straightforward."

"I like the dashboard. It's virtual, and you can see the customer results. I can do it at night and in the morning. I think it also automatically emails results."

"froglogic Squish is one of the most desired solutions if you are having a Qt as a framework and if you are looking at GUI regression testing. froglogic is a part of Qt as a company."

"This product can work with QT applications and cross-cut from them on Windows or Mac."

"I find it very user-friendly and easy to start working with. The main benefit for me is that it allows testing applications developed in the Qt language. This capability makes Squish a game-changer, as it's the only tool I've found that enables automation for applications written in Qt. I appreciate three main aspects. Firstly, the documentation is excellent. Secondly, I value the way the tool efficiently locates elements during testing. These are the two aspects I particularly like."

Cons

"We encountered some minor bugs, and I would like to have the ability to add load generators to workspaces without having to use APIs. We can't do that now, so we're beholden to the APIs."

"The scanning capability needs improvement."

"The pricing is high"

"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."

"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."

"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."

"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."

"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."

More BlazeMeter cons

"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."

"The price could be better."

"I'm relatively new to Squish, so I'm not familiar with all its pros and cons. Currently, I haven't identified any specific improvements. However, one feature I miss is Git integration within the tool. In my previous experience with Selenium and Python in PyCharm, it was straightforward to create and review changes before pushing them. I haven't found a similar option in Squish, and having an integrated tool for managing conflicts would be beneficial in certain scenarios where collaboration is involved."

"There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package."

"The platform could be improved by implementing some basic functionalities that are frequently used, such as login procedures and screen handling when multiple screens are used at the workplace."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."

"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."

"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 pricing is reasonable."

"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."

"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."

"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."

"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."

More BlazeMeter pricing and cost advice

"It is expensive."

"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."

"The platform is highly-priced."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

801,394 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Manufacturing Company

18%

Computer Software Company

18%

Healthcare Company

Transportation Company

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 ...

See all answers

What do you like most about BlazeMeter?

It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BlazeMeter?

It is a bit pricey, especially if you're primarily interested in its recording and script conversion features. However, you'll need to opt for the higher-priced plans to access advanced features li...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for froglogic Squish?

The platform is highly-priced.

See all answers

What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?

The platform could be improved by implementing some basic functionalities that are frequently used, such as login procedures and screen handling when multiple screens are used at the workplace.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for froglogic Squish?

My primary use case for this solution is for automatic software testing. Specifically, I use it to test software's user interfaces using a test tool that automates these tests.

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs BlazeMeter

Compared 70% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs BlazeMeter

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs BlazeMeter

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs BlazeMeter

Compared 3% of the time

Tricentis Flood vs BlazeMeter

Compared 2% of the time

More BlazeMeter Competitors

SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish

Compared 20% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 19% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 9% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Qt Squish

Compared 6% of the time

More Qt Squish Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter

September 2024

Download BlazeMeter product report

Buyer's Guide

Qt Squish

August 2024

Download Qt Squish product report

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud

froglogic Squish

Learn More

Perforce

Qt Group

Overview

BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery.

The rapidly growing BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.

Take the complexity out of testing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and human-machine interfaces (HMIs) – even in the face of product evolution and safety-critical applications.

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub

Google, Nokia, Pfizer, Siemens, Synopsys, Airbus, Boeing, Mercedes Benz, Disney, Shell, Reuters, Vodafone, XILINX, GE, Ericsson

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter vs. Qt Squish

July 2024

Free Report: BlazeMeter vs. Qt Squish

Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. Qt Squish and other solutions. Updated: July 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

801,394 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BlazeMeter vs. Qt Squish report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.