Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs SmartBear LoadNinja 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.8%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 2.1%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 13.8%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad13.8%
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)5.8%
SmartBear LoadNinja2.1%
Other78.3%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
Kapil Tarka - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support
It's a new tool when I compare it with LoadViewer and HP LoadRunner. It needs time to mature. For example, it needs to improve concurrency. When you run a test suite, your scripts will generate some test data. If we are running a banking application and then we are running a full end-to-end suite, there are many actions that need testing. There's a lot of data getting generated. There should be a variable that we can store for later in our later test cases. We need data management and dynamic data generation to be able to capture the data which is generated.
Dirk O. Schweier - PeerSpot reviewer
Key reports enable insightful analysis and useful for continuous performance validation
Since the ownership of NeoLoad has changed to Tricentis, they have done a very poor job with license management. They changed the license policy very abruptly. The effect of the new license policy is that NeoLoad becomes more and more unattractive for smaller companies, and only bigger companies are interested or find the license fee fair. The smallest license fee is very high, and there is no starter package at the moment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter."
"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"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."
"We have Performance Center as a platform to share with others that don't do performance testing full-time, so that they in an agile fashion, on demand can go ahead and get real issue-finding testing done."
"The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis NeoLoad for us has been its ability to easily monitor all the load generators and configure the dynamics and data rates. Additionally, we can monitor individual loads and data directly within NeoLoad without needing third-party tools."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"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."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"The dashboards give extensive statistics, which help with quick report preparation and analysis."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."
 

Cons

"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"It needs time to mature."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"Sometimes it's complicated to maintain the test cases. It's much easier than in JMeter, however. I'm not sure if this depends so much on NeoLoad, or is more based on the environment that we are testing."
"Since the ownership of NeoLoad has changed to Tricentis, they have done a very poor job with license management. They changed the license policy very abruptly."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"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."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"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."
"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."
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
"It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"This solution can be expensive."
"It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."
"The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
"The tool's pricing is somewhat higher than licensed tools like LoadRunner. The approximate cost is around $25,000. There are no additional charges for maintenance or support. Everything is included in the package we have."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
"Its licensing cost is very less."
"I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of pricing"
"Tricentis NeoLoad is much cheaper compared to other tools like LoadRunner."
"We used a 60-day trial with ten hours of work per month."
"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."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
868,304 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
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
Computer Software Company
23%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise73
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise49
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration in...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
The price of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), including pricing, licensing, and s...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
The analytics and reporting features can be improved, though they are good enough. If you have expertise, you can man...
What do you like most about SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement.
What needs improvement with SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja presented issues around some use cases that we wanted to do. We were using the solution to simula...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear LoadComplete?
For API, we were previously using JMeter, which is an open-source solution. Overall, I rate SmartBear LoadNinja a sev...
Do you recommend Tricentis NeoLoad?
I highly recommend Tricentis NeoLoad for companies that are in need of a versatile load and performance testing tool....
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...
What do you like most about Tricentis NeoLoad?
The most valuable feature of Tricentis NeoLoad for us has been its ability to easily monitor all the load generators ...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
SmartBear LoadComplete
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Falafel Software
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: September 2025.
868,304 professionals have used our research since 2012.