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

BlazeMeter vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 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
7.7
Selenium HQ offers substantial ROI with time savings, efficiency in testing, and no licensing fees, despite initial learning investment.
 

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
6.2
Selenium HQ relies on community support and online forums for user assistance and troubleshooting rather than official services.
The customer service is not available 24/7, which affects its rating.
I have not had the need to escalate questions to Selenium HQ tech support recently, as open community support is widely available and has been sufficient for our needs.
 

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
7.5
Selenium HQ generally scales well, with successful implementations in various environments, though challenges can arise due to technical demands.
BlazeMeter has the capability to simulate a higher number of users compared to JMeter standalone.
BlazeMeter is quite scalable, and I rate its scalability as nine out of ten.
We can execute thousands of test cases weekly, and our automation coverage using Selenium HQ is approximately eighty-five percent.
 

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
7.2
Selenium HQ's stability varies, with stable use reported widely, though issues arise, especially with specific browsers and updates.
I would rate the stability of BlazeMeter as eight out of ten, indicating that it is a stable and reliable solution.
 

Room For Improvement

Users desire improved pricing, efficiency, integration, documentation, reporting, customization, access control, and enhanced support for testing and setup.
Selenium HQ needs better IE support, cross-browser stability, user-friendly interface, app support, and enhanced documentation for improved usability.
The extra CSV random dataset plugin could be integrated with a simple checkbox in the existing CSV dataset plugin to read files randomly.
The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use.
An automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.
 

Setup Cost

BlazeMeter offers flexible pricing, including pay-as-you-go and annual fees, suitable for larger organizations but pricey for smaller ones.
Selenium HQ is free and appealing to enterprises, though it may incur indirect costs like maintenance and expertise.
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.
Selenium HQ is open-source, supports multiple languages, and offers cross-browser compatibility with extensive integration and scalability features.
BlazeMeter offers a higher limit on load simulation compared to standalone JMeter.
BlazeMeter integrates with JMeter via multiple plugins, which streamlines performance testing, test monitoring, and report sharing.
New features in Selenium HQ make object identification easier without reliance on XPath and CSS.
 

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd), Load Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
111
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

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 Selenium HQ is 3.7%, down from 5.5% 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.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

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.
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
Selenium is easy to install and mostly free, so there's no need for a license. This lack of costs makes it an attractive option.
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.