BlazeMeter vs. Robot Framework vs. TestingBot

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.

Incentivized

It suits for checking features of a simple web application or features that don't heavily rely on AJAX. You could create tests that check if application is running properly and raise alarm if required so someone can manually check for problems. However making big test sets to produce reliable results may prove to be difficult or impossible. Also running lots of test cases can take hours.

Incentivized

Before, I received a lot of bad feedback from my users because my site was not compatible with certain browsers and operating systems. but now with TestingBot I can automatically test my website with the most used systems and fix these bugs and avoid losing customers. TestingBot integrates with the most popular continuous integration platforms such as Jenkins, TeamCity, GitHub Actions, and more. The browser and device grid are compatible with Selenium, Appium, Cypress, and other frameworks.

Incentivized

• BlazeMeter takes the .jmx script that teams had written for JMeter. The transition from JMeter to BlazeMeter was seamless.
• BlazeMeter offers its own cloud and hence we did not have to set it up on-premise.
• BlazeMeter hits our application from various geographic locations that simulates real life users.

Incentivized

• Automatically test my website on many browsers and operating systems.
• Generate a video for each test.
• Test my site live and manually on any browser and OS from the cloud.

Incentivized

• Blazemeter reporting is very basic and shallow. There is no way to drill down or correlate. I can get better reports by using JMeter for free.
• Blazemeter is very costly. Testing with volumes of more than 1K cu is expensive, and can be done for much cheaper if a company/team is willing to invest a bit of time to figure out how to use cloud instances and jmeter slaves, and to write a basic script to collect resulting xml output.

Incentivized

• Add other frameworks such as Symfony for PHP.

Incentivized

Easy to setup to do API Performance Testing. Dashboard to showcase results Capability to showcase runtime results

Incentivized

In comparison with Blazemeter the closes competitor is JMeter but it has disadvantages like it is not a tool that can be use as a collaborative tool and works locally in a computer, Blazemeter is in the web so different people can access and run tests or collaborate do add, edit or delete the existent scripts.

Incentivized

I chose TestingBot because it is easier to install on my site as well if you compare it with other testing services that I have known. Also, the live interactive testing is very fluid with TestingBot which was not the case with the other tools.

Incentivized

• It helped positively by helping to identify the maximum capacity needed for high traffic periods
• Saved revenue by eliminating unwanted duplication of systems

Incentivized

• Reduce bugs on my website UI.
• Adapt the UI of my site to as many systems/OS/devices as possible.

Incentivized