Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.4
BlazeMeter improves testing, reduces costs, increases productivity, supports DevOps integration, and offers superior scalability for enhanced service delivery.
Sentiment score
6.8
LoadRunner Professional offers strong ROI with reduced downtime, improved performance, and cost savings, justifying its initial investment.
Sentiment score
7.0
Tricentis NeoLoad delivers significant ROI by enhancing testing efficiency, saving costs, and quickly addressing performance issues.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
BlazeMeter's customer service is praised for knowledge and responsiveness, with room for improvement in response speed and availability.
Sentiment score
6.0
OpenText LoadRunner Professional support varies, with mixed feedback on responsiveness; community forums are often used for assistance.
Sentiment score
7.6
Tricentis NeoLoad offers responsive, expert support, praised for flexibility, though some experience occasional delays; overall satisfaction remains high.
The customer service is not available 24/7, which affects its rating.
If I need to rate support from one to ten, I would say it is a nine.
The technical support is really excellent.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
BlazeMeter is praised for scalable performance to thousands of users, though some seek enhanced dynamic user features.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText LoadRunner Professional provides scalable testing with high user counts, diverse protocols, but may require careful consideration of resource needs.
Sentiment score
7.5
Tricentis NeoLoad efficiently scales for varying user volumes, supporting large applications with high user satisfaction and deployment flexibility.
BlazeMeter has the capability to simulate a higher number of users compared to JMeter standalone.
BlazeMeter is quite scalable, and I rate its scalability as nine out of ten.
We look at the scalability because we are using the SaaS model now.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
BlazeMeter is generally stable, with rapid bug resolution and reliability praised, but users suggest improvements for large test performance.
Sentiment score
7.7
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering is highly stable and reliable, preferred over other tools despite minor bugs.
Sentiment score
7.4
Tricentis NeoLoad is generally stable, though large-scale performance tests and environment settings may cause minor stability issues.
I would rate the stability of BlazeMeter as eight out of ten, indicating that it is a stable and reliable solution.
I see it is stable, though there are some glitches or latency sometimes.
 

Room For Improvement

BlazeMeter users seek improvements in pricing, functionality, integration, testing compatibility, scalability, and data management for a better experience.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is expensive and complex, needing simplification, better integration, automation, and enhanced reporting features.
NeoLoad needs protocol support, UI improvements, affordable pricing, better documentation, and refined reporting for large projects.
The extra CSV random dataset plugin could be integrated with a simple checkbox in the existing CSV dataset plugin to read files randomly.
The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use.
I find that AI functionality in OpenText LoadRunner Professional should be improved and more accessible.
The effect of the new license policy is that NeoLoad becomes more and more unattractive for smaller companies, and only bigger companies are interested or find the license fee fair.
 

Setup Cost

BlazeMeter offers competitive, flexible pricing with varied models, regional options, and custom contracts, integrating with tools like New Relic.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers flexible scaling and support but may be costly compared to competitors due to additional user fees.
Tricentis NeoLoad is seen as cost-effective and flexible, adaptable to business needs, but costs can rise with expanded use.
BlazeMeter requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.
 

Valuable Features

BlazeMeter offers cloud-based load testing and integration with tools like JMeter, enhancing testing efficiency with user-friendly features.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers robust scripting, analytics, diverse protocol support, and advanced scaling for efficient performance testing.
Tricentis NeoLoad offers easy script creation, integration, and comprehensive analysis for effective performance testing across various environments.
BlazeMeter offers a higher limit on load simulation compared to standalone JMeter.
BlazeMeter integrates with JMeter via multiple plugins, which streamlines performance testing, test monitoring, and report sharing.
Overall, the installation was quite easy since OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is SaaS-based.
The most valuable feature of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is the analysis part that is really good, along with the support for multiple protocols.
Most graphs can be configured with drag-and-drop, which is handy, and you get graphs suitable for reporting issues.
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 9.0%, down from 16.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 13.7%, up from 12.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 13.8%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BlazeMeter9.0%
Tricentis NeoLoad13.8%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.7%
Other63.5%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Manoj Raghavendra - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides global load simulations without managing infrastructure and offers built-in reporting features
BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for. The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use. Additionally, if there is no host in preferred locations such as some Asian or Middle Eastern countries, it might not be convenient to use BlazeMeter.
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
Dirk O. Schweier - PeerSpot reviewer
Key reports enable insightful analysis and useful for continuous performance validation
Since the ownership of NeoLoad has changed to Tricentis, they have done a very poor job with license management. They changed the license policy very abruptly. The effect of the new license policy is that NeoLoad becomes more and more unattractive for smaller companies, and only bigger companies are interested or find the license fee fair. The smallest license fee is very high, and there is no starter package at the moment.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
868,229 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise22
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise66
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise49
 

Questions from the Community

How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?
Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and perfo...
What do you like most about BlazeMeter?
It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BlazeMeter?
BlazeMeter's pricing depends on the type of account used. They offer multiple account types, with cost variations bas...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which help...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I would like to improve OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on what we discussed in our last discussion, as those ...
Do you recommend Tricentis NeoLoad?
I highly recommend Tricentis NeoLoad for companies that are in need of a versatile load and performance testing tool....
What is your primary use case for Neotys NeoLoad?
My relationship with Tricentis NeoLoad is that I implemented it during a trial period, and then they implemented some...
What do you like most about Tricentis NeoLoad?
The most valuable feature of Tricentis NeoLoad for us has been its ability to easily monitor all the load generators ...
 

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: September 2025.
868,229 professionals have used our research since 2012.