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

IBM Rational Performance Tester 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Rational Performance Te...
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (15th)
Tricentis NeoLoad
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd), Load Testing Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM Rational Performance Tester is designed for Test Management Tools and holds a mindshare of 3.5%, up 1.4% compared to last year.
Tricentis NeoLoad, on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 11.6% mindshare, down 16.1% since last year.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Rational Performance Tester3.5%
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
TestRail5.9%
Other81.2%
Test Management Tools
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad11.6%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)14.4%
Apache JMeter9.8%
Other64.2%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Xcelliti
Supports web and mobile applications, very scalable, very stable, and wonderful support
There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies.
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

"Customization and extensions made in Java is valuable because this can help you set elements to improve your results."
"Comprehensive Rational Performance Tester results allow testers to identify bottlenecks in the systems under test."
"It's definitely helped in scaling the performance of our application."
"ROI is big because we do not need vendors to assist some with performance testing."
"The setup was straightforward, it depends on the company's regulations and infrastructure policies."
"It has improved our visibility of reporting and simplifying performance testing for larger projects/programs."
"This tool is very scalable, and for large scale tests, i.e., 5000 virtual users and up, it performs very well."
"With each new version, the tool gets better and better features."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"Script designing and "free" network emulation are the most valuable features for us."
"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."
"I particularly like Neoload’s ease of use, built in monitoring and their extensive library of wireless devices and protocols."
"We've gotten 20% increase in tests-per-sprint and 35% decrease in time taken to create a script, and we also have cost savings of over one million dollars annually."
"Customer support is excellent, with a very quick turn around time for any question asked."
"We are able to use NeoLoad to quickly expand performance testing to all critical business applications and address some key performance issues."
 

Cons

"It is complex for a novice."
"I’d like to see a tighter integration with Rational Quality Manager and the Jazz platform."
"As intuitive as a product can be, its use could still benefit from a decent set of manuals or guides."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."
"The tool has lots of limitations."
"Reporting needs improvement to provide more customization options in the performance test analyst to build custom reports."
"It was complex."
"For a rational performance testing solution, the initial setup is very complex. The setup was difficult and the documentation was not very up to date."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"The product keeps its pace with the updates, however I would like them to offer online advance training certification and better support material."
"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's mobile platform acts as a stand-alone application but needs to be integrated with the main interface"
"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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"The UI lacks sufficient object rendering."
"Some users may find NeoLoad too technical, while other users may prefer a scripting language instead of a UI with figures and forms they have to fill in."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is much cheaper than Micro Focus LoadRunner. We need perpetual licenses. Support is included in the first sale. After that, you need to renew support every year."
"I don't have information on the licensing cost of Tricentis NeoLoad because my manager handles that. From a testing perspective and based on company requirements, the current license is for one thousand users."
"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."
"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"Its licensing cost is very less."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is much cheaper compared to other tools like LoadRunner."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
899,324 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
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
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 use case for the product is that if this is in the phone, it could start repairing using the product; it's an ERB application. It's a priority to use the two tools Tricentis NeoLoad ratio to the...
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

Rational Performance Tester
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, UiPath, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: May 2026.
899,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.