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

BlazeMeter vs SmartBear LoadNinja 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
2nd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (10th), API Testing Tools (6th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
SmartBear LoadNinja
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
11th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 11.0%, down from 16.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 1.9%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Manoj Raghavendra - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides global load simulations without managing infrastructure and offers built-in reporting features
BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for. The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use. Additionally, if there is no host in preferred locations such as some Asian or Middle Eastern countries, it might not be convenient to use BlazeMeter.
Kapil Tarka - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support
It's a new tool when I compare it with LoadViewer and HP LoadRunner. It needs time to mature. For example, it needs to improve concurrency. When you run a test suite, your scripts will generate some test data. If we are running a banking application and then we are running a full end-to-end suite, there are many actions that need testing. There's a lot of data getting generated. There should be a variable that we can store for later in our later test cases. We need data management and dynamic data generation to be able to capture the data which is generated.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"One thing that we are doing a lot with the solution, and it's very good, is orchestrating a lot of JMeter agents. This feature has helped us a lot because we can reuse other vendors' performance scripts that they have used with JMeter before."
"Running from the cloud with load distribution, exhibiting load from different geo-regions. Generating the load from different cloud regions is the best feature."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"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."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"One key advantage of using BlazeMeter is that it does not require me to manage my own infrastructure."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
 

Cons

"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"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."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"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."
"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."
"BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"It needs time to mature."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."
"The product pricing is reasonable."
"The solution is free and open source."
"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."
"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."
"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."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 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
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Healthcare Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement.
What needs improvement with SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja presented issues around some use cases that we wanted to do. We were using the solution to simulate using a browser and to give some browser access to our use case for multiple ...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear LoadComplete?
For API, we were previously using JMeter, which is an open-source solution. Overall, I rate SmartBear LoadNinja a seven out of ten.
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
SmartBear LoadComplete
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
Falafel Software
Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. SmartBear LoadNinja and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.