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

BlazeMeter vs SmartBear TestComplete 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
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)
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 6.0%, down from 7.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation 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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds the on-premises hosting solutions, so we have implemented a hybrid approach. BlazeMeter sets us up for our traditional hosting platforms and application stack as well as the modern cloud-based or SaaS-based application technologies."
"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"There is a repository of all the scripts that we have created. You can go back and compare tests to see what the tests looked like. If I want to go and compare something with whatever happened six months or one year back, I can do that."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"The integration with various tools is important."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, when we execute tests, the results calculated by BlazeMeter, specifically the response times for failed transactions, are incorrect."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"The product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"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."
"The scalability features still need improvement."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The solution is free and open source."
"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."
"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"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."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
839,422 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%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
 

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 SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I don't know much about the pricing, however, I think it's cheaper.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing.
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.