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

Tricentis Flood 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

Tricentis Flood
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
16th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Tricentis Flood is 2.9%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 12.2%, down from 18.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad12.2%
Tricentis Flood2.9%
Other84.9%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Test Process Consultant - PeerSpot reviewer
SME (Subject Matter Expert) at Maersk
Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options
The solution is not in an optimal state. During POC, we analyzed tool is kept on upgrading. The patch deployment is happening in parallel, things that are working today are not working tomorrow. We eventually sorted it out with help of CSM. We integrated this tool with other software such as Azure client, but many times without a valid or visible reason, the connectivity was breaking. Improvement suggestions- The dashboard creation for the reporting needs to be easier. Currently, the solution does not support multiple script executions and we would like to see support for this.
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 most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"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 pros outweigh the cons and so NeoLoad is highly recommended over its competitors."
"The solution is a UI-based tool, so it's easy to use because we don't have to do actual recording with it. This makes it easier to use, and, in terms of speed, it's a bit faster than other tools when it comes to scripting."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
"NeoLoad is actually really good, mainly because they have a world-class support service."
"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."
"I have worked on various different performance testing tools, and I found NeoLoad very much within budget without compromising the quality of the product."
 

Cons

"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"The solution lacks a little bit in the reporting features."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"Analysis can be further improved. I have been using LoadRunner analysis and it has been a very powerful tool."
"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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"The rendering of heavyweighted applications can't be scripted via NeoLoad, so we have to use LoadRunner as an extra client."
"The weakest feature of most of the load test tools is result analysis."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"The solution can be improved by introducing a secure testing feature."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is in the average price range compared to other testing tools."
"The only positive point is it came free with my test automation tool."
"The licensing cost is less compared to other licensing performance testing tools."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
"I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"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."
"The solution requires an annual license."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
902,270 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
No data available
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Tricentis Flood?
Tricentis Flood is the kind of versatile load and performance testing solution that my organization and I cannot help but recommend. It is recognized by companies across a wide variety of fields as...
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?
My use case for the product is that if this is in the phone, it could start repairing using the product; it's an ERB application. It's a priority to use the two tools Tricentis NeoLoad ratio to the...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis NeoLoad?
The vendor offers flexible licensing options. Tricentis NeoLoad has a SaaS platform. The solution can probably be available between 30 and 50 thousand per year, while open-source tools cost way less.
 

Also Known As

Flood IO
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nike, heroku, Soulcycle, NEC, boston.com, Typeform, Xero, Telus
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis Flood vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.