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

BlazeMeter vs RadView WebLOAD comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 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 Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (9th), API Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (7th)
RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 6.6%, down from 14.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.0%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BlazeMeter6.6%
RadView WebLOAD3.0%
Other90.4%
Performance 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.
it_user1265766 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Team Lead at Medtronic, Inc.
IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated
You pay for the number of users that you're going to be utilizing. In order to scale up, you would have to pay for additional users, but for our use case, we're able to scale fairly easily. We have a license for 500, but we're using half of that for our initial workflow. For maintenance, as far as I'm aware, there's only one person really working on the maintenance of it and we only really have one user consistently using the software. He's a QA person. We don't have any plans to increase our usage. Even though we've had it for a while, we have a major push to start utilizing it more. I imagine we'll probably be using it and utilizing it across our QA team in the next year. We're in the process of determining whether we're going to keep it or not due to the fact that it is so expensive. That's why I've been researching alternatives for the RadView.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution’s most valuable feature is the dashboard."
"The feature that stands out the most is their action groups. They act like functions or methods and code, allowing us to reuse portions of our tests. That also means we have a single point for maintenance when updates are required. Instead of updating a hundred different test cases, we update one action group, and the test cases using that action group will update."
"The most valuable aspect of BlazeMeter is its user-friendly nature, ability to conduct distributed load testing and comprehensive analysis and reporting features. It particularly excels in providing a clear and organized view of load test results."
"The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based nature, which allows us to conduct tests without relying on local resources."
"It is focused on concurrency testing, which has been especially beneficial for us. Their previous experiences had caused major setbacks."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"The user interface is good."
"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."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"Customer service is excellent; they're very responsive and willing to work extra hours, and in the first couple of hours that we were up and running, they taught us how to implement it and to figure out and negotiate AWS."
"Technical support has been excellent, responsive, and helpful in trying to work through issues and questions."
"The analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"The ability to conceptualize the experience for users is great, the price as the bang for your buck is good, the user interface is quite user friendly, and the graphics make it easy to follow and are easy to identify."
 

Cons

"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"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 customer service is not available 24/7, which affects its rating. I would rate it as a seven because they respond once they are available."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"It's a rather expensive tool for running just a few tests — which is our primary use case, if there was a pricing structure that met our use case price wouldn’t be of concern."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"The tool fails to offer better parameterization to allow it to run the same script across different environments, making it a feature that needs a little improvement."
"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 did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"Well there’s one issue when I have five or six scripts-- you have to set up different percentages and the number of connections and users, no matter how I tweak it seems that when I have one of the load scripts in the mix set, a percentage of less than 8-10%, there’s a probability that it won’t run at all."
"I would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"It would be great, in addition to the load tool, it would be nice, if Radview offered a JavaScript based functional test tool as well."
"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."
"It is an averagely priced product."
"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."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"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."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"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 costs $8,600 yearly and we have the Cloud, which is an additional $800. Our perpetual license is $800 and then the Cloud functionality with our 500 users is the $8,600."
"We purchased a license for two years."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Retailer
6%
Performing Arts
14%
Government
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

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 Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

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?
Regarding pricing, it is favorable compared to other tools, providing good value. The licensing is flexible, with options for one or two-year terms based on user requirements, and BlazeMeter occasi...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. RadView WebLOAD and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.