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

RadView WebLOAD vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

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
13th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
12th
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
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 1.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 16.2%, up from 14.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Vadim Urintsov - PeerSpot reviewer
An excellent solution for graph testing on programming software
Our primary use case for the solution is for graph testing on programming software The information provided via the solution and the dashboard is valuable. Additionally, it's interesting as you can view inside information integrated and see the WebLOAD with APM. There is no analytical dashboard…
Vivekanandan Vallinayagam - PeerSpot reviewer
Has a highly intuitive UI and easy integrations and has an impressive reporting framework
The solution offers an easy setup process. Tricentis NeoLoad has intuitive installers to facilitate a seamless deployment process. Our organization works with both the on-prem and SaaS models of Tricentis NeoLoad as per the client's needs. As part of the deployment process in our company, at first, we typically provision some VMs, and then we get the installers and license codes upon purchase. Following the aforementioned step, the .exe controller is installed, and in the help section of the product's portal, the license needs to be applied. The deployment process of the solution takes around one or two days. The product doesn't require many resources for deployment and can be easily maintained. The SaaS version is maintained by the vendor, while the on-prem version allows the user to archive the reports and results.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"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. The tool has a better design, scenarios, and model, which I find helpful. I also found the Result Manager a fascinating part of Tricentis NeoLoad because of the way it collates results and presents reports. The straightforward implementation of Tricentis NeoLoad, including ease of use, is also valuable to my team."
"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."
"With the tool, it is possible to compare NeoLoad test results against baseline and benchmark, and we can make the comparisons in the same window."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"The dashboards give extensive statistics, which help with quick report preparation and analysis."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"It's a low-code testing tool"
"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."
 

Cons

"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"There is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
"Since the ownership of NeoLoad has changed to Tricentis, they have done a very poor job with license management."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"The SAP area could be improved."
 

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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is much cheaper compared to other tools like LoadRunner."
"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"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."
"I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The tool is not cheap."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 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%
Government
13%
Healthcare Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Educational Organization
37%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
The solution is for continuous performance validation. The important thing is that it's not just for one load test and then forgotten. I try to integrate the performance tests into our pipelines, w...
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 and configure the dynamics and data rates. Additionally, we can monitor individu...
 

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: May 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.