We performed a comparison between Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud 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.
"It's a fast product, so you don't have much trouble in terms of maintenance overhead. You don't want to just look into configuring load generators, look for upgrades, and end up having that take up a lot of your time. With this solution, you just log in and you start using it. This means that there is a huge benefit in terms of the overhead of maintaining the infrastructure and the maintenance effort."
"The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."
"The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I"
"The solution can scale."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"NeoLoad offers better reporting than most competing tools. It is effortless to analyze and measure the reported data. It's also simple to generate a report that most people can read and management can understand. NeoLoad helps you figure out the main issues inside the application."
"My company has a good experience with Tricentis NeoLoad, and what I like best about it is that it lets you generate loads from different geographies. The load generation agents getting placed on different geographies is a very good feature of the solution. I also like that you can scale up Tricentis NeoLoad very quickly. The general feedback on performance testing with Tricentis NeoLoad for all product lines within my company is good."
"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."
"CI/CD integration could be a little bit better. When there's a test and if you see that there are high response times in the test itself, it would be great to be able to send an alert. It would give a heads-up to the architect community or ops community."
"We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."
"I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"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."
"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."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"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."
"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."
Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 7th in Performance Testing Tools with 5 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 10 reviews. Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.6, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enabled us to eliminate load generators, and automatically triggers and produces reports". 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". Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, BlazeMeter and Oracle Application Testing Suite, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, BlazeMeter, Tricentis Flood and Tricentis Tosca. See our Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud 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.
