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

BlazeMeter vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (4th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.6%, down from 6.3% 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.
LokeshYadav - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation
I've also worked with Micro Focus. I'm working with Micro Focus, however, for that part, I'm working on the mainframe - although I've done some web testing using Micro Focus on a website. Otherwise, I found Selenium to be easier, and simpler to use than Micro Focus when it comes to the web. A lot of support online is available. A lot of forums, and communities are there. For Micro Focus, the part where you identify objects on a webpage, that part is pretty simple on Selenium. You can use XPath or CSS or IDE or anything, and it works fine. Yet with Micro Focus, the web part, I found it a little tedious to work with. Selenium is much easier in that sense on the web part.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability is good."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"The solution’s most valuable feature is the dashboard."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"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."
"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"The product is quite stable."
"Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop."
"The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
 

Cons

"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."
"One problem, while we are executing a test, is that it will take some time to download data. Let's say I'm performance testing with a high-end load configuration. It takes a minimum of three minutes or so to start the test itself. That's the bad part of the performance testing... every time I rerun the same test, it is downloaded again... That means I have to wait for three to four minutes again."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"The product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"The Timeline Report panel has no customization options. One feature that I missed was not having a time filter, which I had in ELK. For example, there are only filter requests for a time of less than 5 seconds."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"There is a need for an auto-healing feature that can address script failures due to changes in the front end."
"When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities."
"Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"The initial setup was difficult."
"You need to have experience in order to do the initial setup."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"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."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"The solution is free and open source."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"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."
"Selenium HQ costs around $1000 per month, which is a bit high based on what they're offering."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"It is free to use."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"It is free."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
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's pricing is competitive but can be negotiable.
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?
As an open-source tool, Selenium does not have direct costs, but coding can be money-intensive because it is challenging.
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
SeleniumHQ
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

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: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.