No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Str...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is 1.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 11.3%, down from 18.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad11.3%
Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing1.6%
Other87.1%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1631949 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect ICT at a non-tech company with 10,001+ employees
User-friendly, cheap, and quick to set up
It's actually quite easy to set it up. You can change your upgrade plan at any time. The pricing is reasonable. The support was also very good. They are great at helping you set it up. Overall, it's user-friendly. I like that you can also use different servers, which I used in Europe or in different contexts. The reporting is okay. I can get notifications via email, which is nice. Everything is immediate and in real-time.
SK
Senior Solution Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Performance testing has improved daily analysis workflows and supports detailed repair decisions
For Tricentis NeoLoad, I don't think there is much that needs improvement. Probably the use of the features can be made much more user-friendly, but this one didn't take it. Other than that, I'm not sure what could be improved. I would probably like to see some new functionalities for Tricentis NeoLoad, such as a converting mechanism, so that if my earlier project could be running, loader, some of the tools, if they have the converter-enabled in the back to the tool, probably I can just use the converter, and they would do the script conversion. For our script, they are open to order at the new system. Other than that, probably they can bring them into that suite together to the new role so they can utilize that as well to do some data population there. For now, we could have some product to create the data, and then we would like to ask in another. Then we did two reviews; it probably says that has been enabled for the tool. That will be once using so that we can have a single source which can run yet, as it's currently running one for a function or a performance. They don't have anything for this data, actually. That is also there, so we can just move. We can just move left to that. That can be used as a platform for both functional support system, but we can do that as very effective. If there are something like service utilization and the ability to place some of the visible analogs, that would make it much easier to have one tool that scales all the services.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"LoadView is a perfect cloud-based load testing tool."
"LoadView is a flexible solution, which protects your investments."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The initial setup is easy, and if you need more help, they are there to assist."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"The GUI based scripting is a huge time saver for us since we don’t have a dedicated performance team yet, as I can create scripts quickly and get tests going."
"The most valuable feature that we've found useful is that NeoLoad provides a variety of bandwidths."
"Overall, it seems like a good product."
"A complex LoadRunner script could take days to create, but the same script in NeoLoad could be created within hours."
"We are able to create load test scripts quickly in a fast paced environment, which in turn helps us identify performance issues."
"A great deal of improvement in application performance happened because we could pin point the bottlenecks."
"Return on investment was better because our deliverables were not getting impacted and it was cheaper, so return on investment increased a lot compared to LoadRunner."
 

Cons

"If I do the web application test, I want to bypass a login part."
"A lot of time you start the stress testing, and you sign the log in again, and I want to get rid of that. It's just not clear to me how to do it yet."
"Connecting with the solution's technical support can be time-consuming. The turnaround time for a ticket raised is around 72 hours, which becomes an issue when working on a huge project in our company."
"If one person opens any script, another person won't be able to work on it simultaneously. If they can improve that feature, it would be helpful for everyone. I found that incorporating all the scripts into a single project was the challenging part. This is because we are working on different domains—I'm on one domain, and others are on another. We need to handle all these scripts cautiously."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"It needs improvements when handling binary values."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"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."
"The solution’s pricing is higher compared to other tools. Though the product’s reports are accurate, it needs to be more detailed like other tools."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You can buy plans that range from free to $500 a month."
"We used a 60-day trial with ten hours of work per month."
"The vendor offers flexible licensing options"
"The licensing cost is less compared to other licensing performance testing tools."
"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."
"From a licensing cost perspective, I rate the product an eight out of ten since it is a cheap solution that looks costly for certain areas."
"NeoLoad is cheaper compared to other solutions. There are no additional licensing fees."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate Tricentis NeoLoad's pricing a seven out of ten."
"Pricing for Tricentis NeoLoad could be cheaper because, at the moment, it's expensive. For a year, the solution cost us a lot of money, in particular, more than $50,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees
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
No data available
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Do you recommend Tricentis NeoLoad?
I highly recommend Tricentis NeoLoad for companies that are in need of a versatile load and performance testing tool. This relatively inexpensive solution is recognized by organizations like Oxford...
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 solution on the basis of Tricentis NeoLoad. We tested both virtual infrastructu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis NeoLoad?
The vendor offers flexible licensing options. Tricentis NeoLoad has a SaaS platform. The solution can probably be available between 30 and 50 thousand per year, while open-source tools cost way less.
 

Also Known As

LoadView Stress Testing
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Citrix, Aflac, Xerox, American InterContinental University, UMASS, ITT Technical Institute, Roanoke College
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.