Locust vs MHDDoS
Which should you use? A side-by-side look at what each one does, who it suits, what it costs, how hard it is to set up, and where each falls short.
Open source · MIT
Open-source load testing tool where you write test scenarios as plain Python code.
Open source · MIT
Python script with 60 traffic-flood methods, presented as a DDoS testing toolkit for authorized use.
The short answer
Choose Locust if you need…
- Backend or QA engineers who want load tests kept in version control as normal code
- Python teams who want to reuse existing libraries inside their tests
- Teams running load tests in CI/CD pipelines without a GUI
- Anyone who needs to test highly concurrent workloads from several machines
Choose MHDDoS if you need…
- Security staff testing the resilience of infrastructure they own, with written authorization
- Researchers studying how DDoS protections respond in a controlled, permitted lab setting
- Students learning about attack categories in an authorized environment
Side-by-side
| Locust | MHDDoS | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | App | CLI |
| Price | Free and open source | Free and open source |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| GitHub stars | 28.3k | 16.9k |
| Setup difficulty | Intermediate | Advanced |
| How you get it | Install with a package manager | See the README |
| Main language | Python | Python |
| Last code update | 4 days ago | 9 days ago |
What each one is
Locust
Locust is a free, open-source tool for load testing, which means simulating many users at once to see how a web service or other system behaves under pressure. You describe user behavior in ordinary Python code, then run the test from the command line or a web UI that shows throughput, response times, and errors in real time. Its README says it works mainly with HTTP but can be extended to other protocols.
MHDDoS
MHDDoS is a Python 3 script that sends network traffic in many different patterns, which the README calls DDoS testing with 60 methods. The README says it is for authorized testing and education only, and that it should not be used against systems you do not own or have permission to test. Its listed methods target HTTP-level and lower network layers and include bypass options for several hosting and protection services.
Best for
Locust
- Backend or QA engineers who want load tests kept in version control as normal code
- Python teams who want to reuse existing libraries inside their tests
- Teams running load tests in CI/CD pipelines without a GUI
- Anyone who needs to test highly concurrent workloads from several machines
MHDDoS
- Security staff testing the resilience of infrastructure they own, with written authorization
- Researchers studying how DDoS protections respond in a controlled, permitted lab setting
- Students learning about attack categories in an authorized environment
Strengths
Locust
- Tests are plain Python, so they work with IDEs, version control, and existing libraries
- Each simulated user is lightweight, so one process can handle many concurrent users according to the README
- Offers both a web UI and a headless mode for automation
MHDDoS
- Large, actively maintained-looking project with a clear license (MIT) and a stated scope
- Lists its methods and their layers in a readable table
- Clear authorized-use warnings in the README
Not ideal for
Locust
- People who want a no-code tool, since tests are written in Python
- Teams testing non-HTTP systems who are unwilling to write a custom client, since the README says other protocols need one
- Users looking for a hosted service, since the README points to Locust Cloud and Azure options separately rather than describing a built-in hosted offering
MHDDoS
- Anyone wanting to target a site or network they do not control: the README explicitly forbids this and it can be illegal.
- People looking for a general load-testing tool; purpose-built load testers are designed for measuring app performance and are safer to use.
- Beginners without networking or security background, since the README gives little guidance on safe scoping or setup.
Trade-offs
Locust
- Requires Python knowledge to write tests, and the README describes it as primarily aimed at web services
- Performance per machine depends on hardware; the README acknowledges other tools may handle more requests per second on the same hardware
- Testing non-HTTP systems requires writing your own client code
MHDDoS
- Its core purpose is generating attack traffic, so misuse carries legal and ethical risk
- The README is truncated here, so setup details and exact requirements are unclear
- Method descriptions are short and give little detail on safe configuration
Getting started
MHDDoS
Clone the repository
git clone https://github.com/MatrixTM/MHDDoSFrequently asked questions
What is the difference between Locust and MHDDoS?
Locust: Open-source load testing tool where you write test scenarios as plain Python code. MHDDoS: Python script with 60 traffic-flood methods, presented as a DDoS testing toolkit for authorized use. Locust suits backend or qa engineers who want load tests kept in version control as normal code, while MHDDoS suits security staff testing the resilience of infrastructure they own, with written authorization.
Are Locust and MHDDoS free?
Locust: Free and open source. MHDDoS: Free and open source.
Which is easier to set up, Locust or MHDDoS?
Locust is easier to get started with (rated intermediate); MHDDoS is rated advanced and usually needs more setup.
Is Locust or MHDDoS more popular?
Locust has more GitHub stars (28.3k) than MHDDoS (16.9k). Popularity isn't the same as fit — check which one matches your use case above.
What are other alternatives to Locust and MHDDoS?
Other options people compare them with include System Informer.
Keep comparing
Built from our catalogue entries for both products: open-source details come from each project's README (AI-assisted, refreshed weekly) and GitHub data; AI-tool details are editorial. Spotted something wrong? Let us know from either product's page.