We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"In our company, various teams use BlazeMeter, particularly appreciating its cloud license software, which supports up to 5,000 users. BlazeMeter's cloud capabilities allow us to load test or simulate traffic from any location worldwide, such as Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and even specific cities like Delhi. So, with one cloud license, we can simulate user load from various locations globally."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"With the help of the Mock Services, we are overcoming everything. Wherever we are facing issues, whether they will be long term or temporary, by implementing the Mock Services we can bypass the faulty components that are not needed for our particular testing."
"The feature that stands out the most is their action groups. They act like functions or methods and code, allowing us to reuse portions of our tests. That also means we have a single point for maintenance when updates are required. Instead of updating a hundred different test cases, we update one action group, and the test cases using that action group will update."
"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"What I found best in Tricentis NeoLoad is that it's better with scripting and load test execution in the load testing environment compared to its competitors. The tool has a better design, scenarios, and model, which I find helpful. I also found the Result Manager a fascinating part of Tricentis NeoLoad because of the way it collates results and presents reports. The straightforward implementation of Tricentis NeoLoad, including ease of use, is also valuable to my team."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."
"Lacks an option to include additional users during a test run."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"BlazeMeter needs more granular access control. Currently, BlazeMeter controls everything at a workspace level, so a user can view or modify anything inside that workspace depending on their role. It would be nice if there was a more granular control where you could say, "This person can only do A, B, and C," or, "This user only has access to functional testing. This user only has access to mock services." That feature set doesn't currently exist."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"Tricentis NeoLoad could improve the terminal emulation mainframe. It is not able to use the low code or no code option. You have to code it yourself."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 40 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 57 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Supports SAP and non-SAP applications and helps identify performance issues before production deployment". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis Flood and Perfecto, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and Tricentis Flood. See our BlazeMeter 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.