We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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."For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"I like how you can make modifications to the script on LoadRunner Enterprise. You don't have to go into the IDE itself."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise supports a lot of technologies. The existing performance testing that this tool is capable of is good. The protocols that are available are widely varied when compared to other performance testing tools."
"The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is easy to use and has flexibility that allows it to be used on a variety of applications."
"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"The most beneficial features of the solution are flexibility and versatility in their performance."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"Learning-wise, it's pretty straightforward and flexible because if the person has little knowledge of performance testing and the process, they can definitely easily grab the knowledge from NeoLoad."
"The test cases are quite easy to build and to maintain. This is the most valuable aspect of the solution for us. It's the reason why they changed from JMeter to NeoLoad."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."
"Simple capturing of dynamic variables and simple scripting."
"Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"The solution is expensive."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"We would like to see the addition of one-to-one integrations with the Tricentis Tosca suite to this product, which would then cover the end-to-end needs of our customers who are looking for a single vendor solution."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"The solution can be improved by introducing a secure testing feature."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 58 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". 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". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and RadView WebLOAD. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
