We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and RadView WebLOAD based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"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."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"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."
"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 supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved."
"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."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews while RadView WebLOAD is ranked 11th in Performance Testing Tools with 9 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while RadView WebLOAD is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RadView WebLOAD writes "IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and k6 Open Source, whereas RadView WebLOAD is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and k6 Open Source. See our BlazeMeter vs. RadView WebLOAD report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance Testing 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.