We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and LambdaTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."For me, the best part is that we can graphically see the test result at runtime. It helps us understand the behavior of the application during all stages of the test."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"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."
"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."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"Our test execution time was reduced to 16 mins from five hours when executed in parallel on multiple VMs. This has been extremely helpful!"
"Without a doubt, LambdaTest is one of the big reasons behind our faster deployment and better team collaboration."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"LambdaTest is easy to use, and the documentation provides all the needed information."
"The Docker tunnel integration for local testing can be extremely useful to run on multiple instances in parallel."
"Geolocation testing is as straightforward as ticking checkboxes of browsers, operating systems, and countries."
"The most valuable features are that it's essentially on-demand, and you only focus on getting the code that needs to be executed without having to worry about the OS, hardware, etc."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"My only complaint is about the technical support, where sometimes I found that they would not read into and understand the details of my question before answering it."
"Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved."
"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."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"The scanning capability needs improvement."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"I would like to see all of the features available in the freemium plan so that I can test them."
"Load flow compared to other stacks needs improvement."
"I feel that the automated screenshot testing takes a little longer on MacOS sometimes."
"LambdaTest needs to have native application testing, which would be a great help to my team."
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"I've also had some issues with the speed of certain API calls and the rendering of data. For example, when I'm onboarding data, the process can be slow."
"Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis...There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time."
BlazeMeter is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 41 reviews while LambdaTest is ranked 14th in Functional Testing Tools with 21 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while LambdaTest is rated 8.8. 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 LambdaTest writes "Technical support should be improved, though it has great documentation". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas LambdaTest is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio and Perfecto. See our BlazeMeter vs. LambdaTest report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional 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.
