"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"The stability is good."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"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."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"The licensing cost is very less for NeoLoad. It is user-friendly and easy to understand because they have created so many useful functionalities. When I started working with this tool, we just had to do the initial assessment about whether this tool will be able to support our daily work or not. I could easily understand it. I didn't have to search Google or watch YouTube videos. In just 15 to 20 minutes, I was able to understand the tool."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"The stability is okay."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"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 should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"LoadRunner supports multiple protocols, whereas NeoLoad supports only three protocols. With NeoLoad, we can go for the SAP technology, web-based HTTP, and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP). If I have to simulate .NET application-based traffic, I won't be able to do that. So, protocol support is a limitation for NeoLoad. It should support more protocols."
"There were some features that were lacking in Tricentis NeoLoad, e.g. those were more into Citrix and other complicated protocols, which were supported easily by a competitor: Micro Focus LoadRunner. We also need to look into how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now."
"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."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
The NeoLoad load and performance testing tool for web and mobile apps realistically simulates user activity and monitors infrastructure behavior to eliminate bottlenecks. It covers all performance testing from component and automated tests to system-wide hybrid-cloud load tests.
BlazeMeter is ranked 7th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 7 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 7.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "The action groups allow us to reuse portions of our test and update multiple tests at once". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Good licensing cost, user-friendly, and makes it easy and quick to create scripts". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Selenium HQ and Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Flood and Tricentis Tosca. See our BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad report.
See our list of best Performance 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.