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

RadView WebLOAD vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.5%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 13.0%, down from 13.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad13.0%
RadView WebLOAD3.5%
Other83.5%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1265766 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Team Lead at Medtronic, Inc.
IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated
You pay for the number of users that you're going to be utilizing. In order to scale up, you would have to pay for additional users, but for our use case, we're able to scale fairly easily. We have a license for 500, but we're using half of that for our initial workflow. For maintenance, as far as I'm aware, there's only one person really working on the maintenance of it and we only really have one user consistently using the software. He's a QA person. We don't have any plans to increase our usage. Even though we've had it for a while, we have a major push to start utilizing it more. I imagine we'll probably be using it and utilizing it across our QA team in the next year. We're in the process of determining whether we're going to keep it or not due to the fact that it is so expensive. That's why I've been researching alternatives for the RadView.
AnantJoshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director Intelligent Automation at Truglobal
Performance testing has delivered diverse global retail loads and generates clear diagnostic reports
I did not notice any weak points or downsides in Tricentis NeoLoad except for the cost. Everything else is good with the tool. When I consider that service customers have to pay the cost for the load generation, I find that the cost increases, especially when I want to generate a load for a global customer with different loads in different regions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The ability to conceptualize the experience for users is great, the price as the bang for your buck is good, the user interface is quite user friendly, and the graphics make it easy to follow and are easy to identify."
"Customer service is excellent; they're very responsive and willing to work extra hours, and in the first couple of hours that we were up and running, they taught us how to implement it and to figure out and negotiate AWS."
"The licensing model is very flexible which supports a broad range of budgets, from small projects to enterprise-level setups."
"This is a user-friendly and straightforward solution with a good support system."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"What I found best in Tricentis NeoLoad is that it's better with scripting and load test execution in the load testing environment compared to its competitors."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"Customer support is excellent, with a very quick turn around time for any question asked."
"Compared to support at our previous product, they're more responsive and they're more knowledgeable."
 

Cons

"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"It would be great, in addition to the load tool, it would be nice, if Radview offered a JavaScript based functional test tool as well."
"Well there’s one issue when I have five or six scripts-- you have to set up different percentages and the number of connections and users, no matter how I tweak it seems that when I have one of the load scripts in the mix set, a percentage of less than 8-10%, there’s a probability that it won’t run at all."
"I would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"We did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"They usually answer between 36 and 48 hours for non-critical issues, and with critical issues they hold your hand."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"The bigger the project, the slower it opens in the tool (as expected) but many times can be excruciatingly slow."
"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."
"It needs to support SAP GUI-based applications, which forms 60-70% of our portfolio, as well as Windows (client install) and Citrix-based applications."
"The product is expensive."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We purchased a license for two years."
"It costs $8,600 yearly and we have the Cloud, which is an additional $800. Our perpetual license is $800 and then the Cloud functionality with our 500 users is the $8,600."
"The solution requires an annual license."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"We used a 60-day trial with ten hours of work per month."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
"NeoLoad is expensive, but to my knowledge, it's better than LoadRunner."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
914,262 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
Performing Arts
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise13
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?
Tricentis NeoLoad use cases were for retail, specifically a US based retail customer.
What needs improvement with Tricentis NeoLoad?
I did not notice any weak points or downsides in Tricentis NeoLoad except for the cost. Everything else is good with the tool. When I consider that service customers have to pay the cost for the lo...
 

Also Known As

No data available
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about RadView WebLOAD vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,262 professionals have used our research since 2012.