ACCELQ vs. BlazeMeter

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ACCELQ
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
ACCELQ is an agile quality management platform that helps users achieve continuous delivery for web, mobile, manual testing, and APIs. It can be used to write and manage manual test cases for the functionality that may be too fluid for automation.N/A
BlazeMeter
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
The BlazeMeter Continuous Testing Platform is a unified, end-to-end, next-generation software test automation platform built for both Agile and COE teams, from Perforce. BlazeMeter includes complete continuous testing capabilities deeply integrated into a single, intuitive workflow.
$199
per month
Pricing
ACCELQBlazeMeter
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic
$149.00
per month
Pro
$649.00
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ACCELQBlazeMeter
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ACCELQBlazeMeter
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons

No answers on this topic

Best Alternatives
ACCELQBlazeMeter
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.7 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ACCELQBlazeMeter
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(1 ratings)
9.0
(5 ratings)
User Testimonials
ACCELQBlazeMeter
Likelihood to Recommend
ACCELQ
ACCELQ can support multiple technologies such as web, mobile, API, and mainframe. It’s also suited for SAAS solutions such as Salesforce and addresses challenges such as dynamic HTML. It’s easy to set up, and onboarding is easy, and overall lead time is comparatively less. The overall execution results are captured with screenshots, and it’s easy to debug errors. It has integrations with leading cloud-based desktop and mobile farm services such as Saucelabs, browser stack, etc.; ACCELQ is not developer friendly, and hence the overall adoption for a continuous integration scenario is very limited. If you are using a different test management solution, the integration between accelQ and that tool needs ti to be built and hence requires additional development effort, and it’s buggy too.
Read full review
Perforce Software
It is well suited for applications that are mission-critical or applications that can receive high traffic/transactions at unscheduled time periods. Using the load testing feature of BlazeMeter, we can test and ascertain the capacity of the application without the drawbacks of the usual Apache JMeter load testing which depends heavily on the host system from where the load testing is performed.
Read full review
Pros
ACCELQ
  • Scriptless and hence coding is easy.
  • Maintenance of the scripts are easy.
  • Learning curve is small.
Read full review
Perforce Software
  • Results are easy to read
  • Tests can be run easily
  • Tests can ben imported easily from jMeter
Read full review
Cons
ACCELQ
  • The tool is not developer friendly and hence adoption across developers is low.
  • The tool does not have an admin console to manage the users centrally.
  • Different types of licensing and it’s all user based and hence pricey.
Read full review
Perforce Software
  • BlazeMeter should not require the purchase of 2 dedicated IPs for each suite of performance tests.
  • BlazeMeter should make custom packages cheaper than they are today when purchased for an enterprise and should include dedicated IPs in the package.
  • BlazeMerer should have integration with Jenkins Pipeline 2.0.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
ACCELQ
When we implemented ACCELQ, we conducted POCs with many similar solutions. Among the tools we pursued at that time, accelQ stood out against Tricentis Tosca and QMetry automation studio. However, subject 7 did better. However, they were still in the nascent stages of building the tool, and hence we did not pick it.
Read full review
Perforce Software
Personally, I prefer using JMeter + Redline13, however we had some business folks that wanted to be able to run a few of their own tests. The non-technical individuals preferred to use Blazemeter because of its simple and intuitive UI.
Read full review
Return on Investment
ACCELQ
  • Overall adoption of an automation tool went up.
  • Migration of existing selenium scripts to ACCELQ was relatively easy and less effort.
  • Lack of overall admin console and hence managing the agents across different execution is difficult.
  • Integration between accelQ and any test management tool can be difficult and buggy in most cases, even though it can be coded.
Read full review
Perforce Software
  • It helped positively by helping to identify the maximum capacity needed for high traffic periods
  • Saved revenue by eliminating unwanted duplication of systems
Read full review
ScreenShots