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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd), Load Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (7th)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 1.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 1.8%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BlazeMeter1.6%
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web1.8%
Other96.6%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

NP
Software Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Performance testing for peak retail events has become faster and delivers reliable user load insights
BlazeMeter offers numerous features, but the ones that stand out to me include its ease of use, predefined configurations for high-scale performance testing that can be executed quickly, AI-powered testing, scriptless testing, and accurate API testing with an auto-correction plugin to ensure the accuracy of the tests performed. While I cannot pinpoint a single favorite feature, I find myself using parallel execution frequently because this feature allows multiple tests to be run at once, greatly enhancing my workflow. BlazeMeter effectively handles dependency in microservice architecture, for example, linking one API to another to manage response flows, such as the login and registration APIs, which flows efficiently through BlazeMeter. BlazeMeter has positively impacted my organization by reducing the time required for testing due to its robust features that yield efficient results. Unlike JMeter, which has limitations on user simulations, BlazeMeter allows me to test any number of users, helping my e-commerce website manage unpredictable traffic loads effectively while delivering accurate results I can trust to improve my systems.
reviewer2356440 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Experienced ease in automation with strong support while seeking improvements in low-code options
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web offers flexibility of deployment, from on-premises to UFT One which is on the cloud. They provide capability for immediate deployment, and assets can be migrated easily. They include enablers specifically for quick migration of test assets. While I have not personally been involved in these migrations, I have observed some clients using it directly while others make a complete shift from OpenText to Tricentis platforms. There have not been many clients moving from OpenText platforms from on-premises to cloud because most shifts have been toward different product categories such as Tricentis altogether.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"One key advantage of using BlazeMeter is that it does not require me to manage my own infrastructure."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"The stability is good."
"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 product's most valuable features include its cloud-based nature, which allows us to conduct tests without relying on local resources."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"The product is easy to use."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"ROI is definitely present with OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web; these are very capable tools, and there is no reason ROI should be a challenge."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
 

Cons

"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"The support could be better."
"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."
"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."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"BlazeMeter meets my needs very well, but an area for improvement would be the ability to execute multiple projects simultaneously."
"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
"OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."
"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."
"Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"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 product pricing is reasonable."
"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."
"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 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."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
"The product could be more affordable."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Non Profit
10%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise13
 

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 depends on the type of account used. They offer multiple account types, with cost variations based on features accessible under each account.
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I deal with OpenText Analysis Database and Core Performance Engineering, which are categories of software rather than individual pieces. We focus on the ADM area, which includes ALM, UFT One, UFT D...
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.