Flood IO vs Locust: What are the differences?

1. Scalability: Flood IO offers higher scalability than Locust as it can simulate millions of users while Locust is limited in the number of virtual users it can simulate.
2. Cloud Integration: Flood IO provides seamless integration with cloud platforms like AWS, Azure, and GCP for distributed load testing, whereas Locust requires manual setup for distributed load testing.
3. Reporting and Analysis: Flood IO provides detailed reporting and analysis tools, including real-time metrics and performance insights, while Locust has limited built-in reporting capabilities.
4. Protocol Support: Flood IO supports a wide range of protocols such as HTTP, WebSocket, and JMeter, whereas Locust mainly focuses on HTTP protocol.
5. User Interface: Flood IO offers a user-friendly web interface for test configuration and monitoring, making it easier for users to create and manage performance tests, whereas Locust relies on writing test scripts in Python code.
6. Pricing Model: Flood IO has a pay-as-you-go pricing model based on the number of virtual users and test duration, while Locust is an open-source tool with no licensing fees but requires more manual configuration and maintenance.

In Summary, Flood IO offers superior scalability, cloud integration, reporting capabilities, protocol support, user interface, and pricing model compared to Locust for load testing.