We compared Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad both excel in load testing capabilities and robust reporting features. Apache JMeter offers more extensive customization options and protocol support, while Tricentis NeoLoad is praised for its ease of use and superior customer service. Users suggest that Apache JMeter could improve its user interface and documentation, while Tricentis NeoLoad users desire better integration options and software stability.
Features: The valuable features of Apache JMeter include its versatility in load testing, robust reports and graphs for analysis, excellent support for various protocols, a user-friendly interface, and extensive customization options. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad offers ease of use, intuitive interface, excellent support for load testing and performance monitoring, advanced reporting capabilities, seamless integration with other tools, and efficient handling of complex and large-scale tests.
Pricing and ROI: According to user feedback, the setup cost for Apache JMeter is not mentioned, indicating a smooth and hassle-free process. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad also has a straightforward setup and the pricing is considered reasonable. Both products have easy-to-understand licensing processes., Apache JMeter demonstrated positive outcomes for return on investment, including improved testing processes and cost savings. Tricentis NeoLoad also provided a favorable return on investment, adding value to businesses.
Room for Improvement: In terms of room for improvement, Apache JMeter could benefit from enhancements in its user interface and documentation, particularly for beginners. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad could use improvements in various areas including documentation, user interface design, integration options, and software stability.
Deployment and customer support: Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad have different user reviews regarding the duration required for establishing a new tech solution. Apache JMeter users mentioned three months for deployment and a week for setup, while Tricentis NeoLoad users mentioned three months for deployment and one week for setup or one week for both deployment and setup., Apache JMeter's customer service is praised for being helpful, reliable, and responsive. Customers appreciate their knowledge and prompt responses. Tricentis NeoLoad's customer service is commended for its promptness, professionalism, and efficient query resolution. Users are satisfied with the level of assistance received.
The summary above is based on 66 interviews we conducted recently with Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The performance of the solution is excellent."
"The solution helps by detecting bottlenecks."
"The features that I appreciate are quite basic. It is easy to ramp up the threads and start calling the application. A lot of connectors can already be found within Apache JMeter, but we are not using the entire set because the integration between the customers and platform is based on HTTP. We are just going to produce lots of HTTP sequences."
"We find the load testing feature valuable."
"The reporting features are really good. There's a lot less latency than other solutions."
"The metrics part of it and the ability to write your custom code to do some specific tests in the performance testing space are the most valuable features."
"JMeter's most valuable feature is the RegEx Extractor."
"It is open source as well as relatively extendable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features. Its deployment is also very easy."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis NeoLoad for us has been its ability to easily monitor all the load generators and configure the dynamics and data rates. Additionally, we can monitor individual loads and data directly within NeoLoad without needing third-party tools."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"NeoLoad offers better reporting than most competing tools. It is effortless to analyze and measure the reported data. It's also simple to generate a report that most people can read and management can understand. NeoLoad helps you figure out the main issues inside the application."
"Learning-wise, it's pretty straightforward and flexible because if the person has little knowledge of performance testing and the process, they can definitely easily grab the knowledge from NeoLoad."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"Simple capturing of dynamic variables and simple scripting."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
"It should start supporting the presentation layer. It currently provides performance testing specifically at the application and API level. It can be extended to the presentation layer, which includes mainly Angular and React frameworks. It should also be easy to use and easy to train people."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"The UI of the solution needs to be better. The UI takes up a lot of our bandwidth."
"The memory utilization in JMeter is very poor."
"In this tool, automation in general is almost non-existent. Everything is done manually."
"The solution could use some sort of educational features to offer tips and hints to help users navigate it better. They should improve the manuals and help files."
"Automation is difficult in JMeter."
"If JMeter could integrate with the EPM solution, it would be great. It could also be improved by offering more integrations for security. For example, most applications are secure with OpenID Connect protocols."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"The UI lacks sufficient object rendering."
"In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 61 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Offers good user interface, customization and I like how it way it correlates, monitors, and integrates with the user interface". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Katalon Studio, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and ReadyAPI, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Flood. See our Apache JMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
