IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Tricentis NeoLoad OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Tricentis NeoLoad is #4 ranked solution in top Load Testing Tools and #5 ranked solution in top Performance Testing Tools. PeerSpot users give Tricentis NeoLoad an average rating of 8 out of 10. Tricentis NeoLoad is most commonly compared to Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional: Tricentis NeoLoad vs Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 31% of all views.
What is Tricentis NeoLoad?

The NeoLoad load and performance testing tool for web and mobile apps realistically simulates user activity and monitors infrastructure behavior to eliminate bottlenecks. It covers all performance testing from component and automated tests to system-wide hybrid-cloud load tests.

Tricentis NeoLoad was previously known as NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad.

Tricentis NeoLoad Buyer's Guide

Download the Tricentis NeoLoad Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: April 2022

Tricentis NeoLoad Customers

Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford

Tricentis NeoLoad Video

Tricentis NeoLoad Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Tricentis NeoLoad pricing:
  • "Its licensing cost is very less."
  • "NeoLoad is cheaper compared to other solutions. There are no additional licensing fees."
  • "Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
  • "Tricentis NeoLoad price is a benefit of using this tool, it is less expensive than some of the other solutions."
  • "Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
  • Tricentis NeoLoad Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Patrik Badkar - PeerSpot reviewer
    Technical Lead at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Good licensing cost, user-friendly, and makes it easy and quick to create scripts
    Pros and Cons
    • "The licensing cost is very less for NeoLoad. It is user-friendly and easy to understand because they have created so many useful functionalities. When I started working with this tool, we just had to do the initial assessment about whether this tool will be able to support our daily work or not. I could easily understand it. I didn't have to search Google or watch YouTube videos. In just 15 to 20 minutes, I was able to understand the tool."
    • "LoadRunner supports multiple protocols, whereas NeoLoad supports only three protocols. With NeoLoad, we can go for the SAP technology, web-based HTTP, and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP). If I have to simulate .NET application-based traffic, I won't be able to do that. So, protocol support is a limitation for NeoLoad. It should support more protocols."

    What is our primary use case?

    We used it for putting the load on the system. For example, for a big sale of an online marketplace, we created the scripts with performance testing tools such as Neotys and LoadRunner. We used to search for a product and add it to the cart. We used to capture all this traffic through these tools, and then, we used to do the real-time testing. So, we used to simulate the real-world user scenario. For example, if the company was expecting around 20,000 users on a specific day, we used to simulate the volume of 20,000 users on the application. 

    The deployment model depends on a client's requirements and licensing. If we have a sufficient budget, we always go for the SaaS model. If we have a limitation of licensing, then we prefer to go for on-premises deployment. We usually need to get support from the admin team to set up everything. We used to take care of this aspect so that the support team will be able to do things on our behalf, such as setting up things in their environment.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We can quickly do scripting with NeoLoad, which makes it easier to give timelines and meet them. We can easily tell a client that within this much time, we can provide the end-to-end scripts, and we'll be able to do the execution along with all the activities. 

    What is most valuable?

    The licensing cost is very less for NeoLoad. It is user-friendly and easy to understand because they have created so many useful functionalities. When I started working with this tool, we just had to do the initial assessment about whether this tool will be able to support our daily work or not. I could easily understand it. I didn't have to search Google or watch YouTube videos. In just 15 to 20 minutes, I was able to understand the tool.

    We can easily do scripting with NeoLoad. We just have to understand the basic functionality to create a script. There is not that much effort that we have to put in. If I have to transfer knowledge to a new person or a beginner, he will also be able to pick it up quickly. 

    What needs improvement?

    LoadRunner supports multiple protocols, whereas NeoLoad supports only three protocols. With NeoLoad, we can go for the SAP technology, web-based HTTP, and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP). If I have to simulate .NET application-based traffic, I won't be able to do that. So, protocol support is a limitation for NeoLoad. It should support more protocols.

    One issue that we faced was that multiple users weren't able to work on the same application. We used to create multiple scripts based on the application and based on the projects, and then we used to integrate all of them in a single place. With NeoLoad, if you have to do this activity, to import a script, one user has to log off, and the second user has to copy the script and improve it, which is a time-consuming activity. These are the things that can block any further activity.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with this solution for 18 months.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I would rate it a nine out of 10 in terms of scalability. It is currently being used extensively. My organization is huge, and we have an employee count of more than 300,000. I wouldn't be able to provide the exact count, but for my project, 20 people are using this tool.

    How are customer service and support?

    They usually clarify any queries or issues within three hours. They usually come back to us within three hours, which is as per our SLA, so that's good. I would rate them an eight out of 10.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Previously, we were using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. It is still in use. We haven't completely removed it. We switched because of the licensing and the time taken to create a script.

    Neotys has taken some references from LoadRunner to create NeoLoad. So, in terms of functionality, NeoLoad and LoadRunner are quite the same.

    The licensing cost of NeoLoad is lesser than LoadRunner. LoadRunner supports a higher number of protocols than NeoLoad. LoadRunner has more protocols for interacting with the application than NeoLoad. So, there are multiple things that we can simulate with LoadRunner, such as a desktop application or traffic for a banking domain.

    If I have to create a script in LoadRunner, it usually takes around six hours, but if I do the same thing in Neotys, it usually takes around one and a half hours to complete everything. So, we can provide a deadline for deploying a script. Time is money, so NeoLoad is better in terms of time.

    How was the initial setup?

    It is straightforward. You don't need much understanding from the installation perspective. You just need to download the .exe and install it. You just need the license, and if you are going for the trial version, you just upload the license. If you are going for a business license, you just have to tie up with them and reach an agreement. That's it. 

    It is a one-day thing. One day is enough to complete the installation and the setup.

    What about the implementation team?

    It was an in-house job. In terms of maintenance, we usually have an admin team and a security team to put patches, etc.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Its licensing cost is very less.

    What other advice do I have?

    If you are dealing only with web HTTP, you can definitely go ahead with this solution because time is money. 

    I would rate NeoLoad an eight out of 10.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Performance Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Affordable price and dynamic value capture is a valuable tool
    Pros and Cons
    • "I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
    • "The SAP area could be improved."

    What is our primary use case?

    The primary use case is for web applications and also SAP GUI—not SAP Applications but the UI version of SAP. For both these areas, it was working fine from the NeoLoad side.

    The solution has been moved to the cloud version.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The first benefit is that it's quite cheaper. In the market there are mainly three tools which dominate: JMeter, LoadRunner, and NeoLoad. JMeter is open source. LoadRunner is quite expensive but has quite good features. NeoLoad is competitively quite cheaper compared to LoadRunner, and it provides great features, except in some areas. For instance, it doesn't allow some SAP applications. There are some areas where it's a little bit tough but other than that, it's quite good.

    What is most valuable?

    I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools. JMeter is a little bit tough, but LoadRunner gives you many features. For any codeless value, it is easy to detect from the NeoLoad side.

    What needs improvement?

    The SAP area could be improved. Not the GUI applications, SAP log-on, or something like that. We can see features and use NeoLoad properly in all the normal SAP log-on areas. I haven't tried it, but I have heard that Citrix-based applications don't work properly in the SAP application. In those types of different areas, there could be more protocol flexibility.

    If there is a high number of users on NeoLoad—like around 5,000 or 6,000—it sometimes feels like that might be a bottleneck for the performance. That could be improved. With more users, there shouldn't be any issues from the tool side.

    With scripting in a different browser, sometimes there are compatibility issues and it doesn't generate the script properly. Those types of crashes could be removed.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I was using NeoLoad six months ago because of some performance testing issues. Previous to using NeoLoad, we used LoadRunner.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability is good. It's quite reliable. Compared with a different browser, it sometimes creates problems and bugs. With the number of users increasing, sometimes the CPU and system where it was connected increases because of trade concurrency or something like that. That can be a little bit problematic. Other than that, things are fine.

    Ongoing maintenance is not required. Whenever we have deployed the tools, if any version upgrade happens, we just check what the upgrade is exactly and someone on the deployment team connects the documents and everything. They check the document accordingly and update the version. It's not complicated.

    We have roughly eight to nine performance testers, including the performance lead, the performance engineers, and the performance testers. Everyone will be running different projects. We'll be using the tool and running the performance testing based on the license and everything. The user count license will be ramping up the load. There are instances where multiple teams are using NeoLoad at the same time with different licenses. There has been no conflict error with each other, and we haven't seen a problem with different license things. Because we have two licenses, two tests can be executed parallel to each other.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable. After the number of users increases to 5,000 or 6,000, we have occasionally found problems. Below that, things are fine and the response times are good.

    How are customer service and support?

    Tech support is okay. When we had 50 users, we reached out to the tech support team and within two to three days we received a response. The time took longer because it was a complicated problem. Response time is perfect.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I previously used LoadRunner. One of the reasons we had to switch to Neotys was because it was quite cheaper, but I still prefer LoadRunner to NeoLoad.

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment process is very straightforward. It's not complex. Only one associate deployed it, so not much effort was required.

    What was our ROI?

    There was no impact on the work that we used to do with performance testing when we moved to NeoLoad. Our normal performance testing was able to continue and it was going perfectly well. Return on investment was better because our deliverables were not getting impacted and it was cheaper, so return on investment increased a lot compared to LoadRunner.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    NeoLoad is cheaper compared to other solutions. There are no additional licensing fees.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate this solution 9 out of 10. I wouldn't give it a 10 because there are some issues that need to be resolved from the tool side.

    Before using the tool, you need to understand the product you are going to design, the different types of performance applications that you are going to do performance testing with, and whether or not NeoLoad supports it. If yes, then go ahead. Otherwise, I would say go back to LoadRunner because whatever the application is, LoadRunner will support it.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Buyer's Guide
    Tricentis NeoLoad
    April 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Tricentis NeoLoad. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2022.
    597,291 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Global Delivery Head at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Stable and scalable load and performance testing solution with good API support and better pricing
    Pros and Cons
    • "Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
    • "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."

    What is our primary use case?

    Tricentis NeoLoad was for a sports client of ours, and they had a web based application, and that application had a lot of APIs floating into a lot of sports applications. They were sports-based solutions, where you have people going to baseball sporting events, registering for the events, getting tickets, etc. That was the load that we tested with Tricentis NeoLoad.

    What is most valuable?

    The API side of Tricentis NeoLoad is good. The API support is much better with this solution, compared with the competition. Pricing for it is also more affordable than its competitor: Micro Focus LoadRunner.

    What needs improvement?

    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.

    What we want to see in this solution is how it integrates with the entire suite of Tricentis Solutions. Tricentis has a very successful product in Tricentis Tosca, and that is a product that is more focused on test automation. They have test management solutions. They have different management. Performance management or performance engineering within one solution would be a big winner for Tricentis NeoLoad, so this is an area for improvement for this solution. Otherwise, it is a really good tool.

    I still need to take a closer look at the integration of Tricentis NeoLoad. I want to see how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now. This is a recent acquisition, so we want to see how these results come together: test automation, performance testing, etc., so that's what I'm looking for.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have used Tricentis NeoLoad and we find it scalable.

    How are customer service and support?

    Tricentis acquired this product a year ago, so prior to that acquisition, the product was owned by an independent company, and their support was really good. We were supporting from India, and we had constant support from them. We never had any challenges with support for Tricentis NeoLoad.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We previously used Micro Focus LoadRunner, and switched to Tricentis NeoLoad because of the cost aspect, and we also found that Tricentis NeoLoad is also a good solution. It has very similar facilities like Micro Focus LoadRunner, but some of the features that are lacking there is more into Citrix and other complicated protocols, which Micro Focus LoadRunner easily supports. The API side of Tricentis NeoLoad was good, so we were able to do really good work with the solution. We bought it recently.

    How was the initial setup?

    Compared to Micro Focus LoadRunner, the setup for Tricentis NeoLoad is easy.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner.

    Pricing is really less compared to Micro Focus LoadRunner, but once this product goes under the Tricentis umbrella, we don't know how much are they charging for it now. I have not looked into the most recent pricing for Tricentis NeoLoad.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I have experience with performance testing tools, particularly Micro Focus LoadRunner, Apache JMeter, and Tricentis NeoLoad. We also did a POC with Tricentis Flood, but that is now gone. We also did some work with Microsoft, but they have started removing it. Even Microsoft provides a solution for performance testing: Visual Studio.

    What other advice do I have?

    I'm rating Tricentis NeoLoad seven out of ten, while Micro Focus LoadRunner I'm rating a five out of ten. I'm not giving Tricentis NeoLoad a score of ten because I want to see more out of it in terms of integration, particularly how it integrates with other Tricentis products.

    There is a customized version for BlazeMeter, but it's a solution that cannot be compared with either Micro Focus LoadRunner or Tricentis NeoLoad, because it is more of an open source solution, so you do not get support that's comparable with the support you get from paid solutions.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    RajaRao - PeerSpot reviewer
    Associate at Tech Mahindra Limited
    Real User
    Top 5
    Offers excellent support and the pricing is reasonable but it has a few glitches
    Pros and Cons
    • "The stability is okay."
    • "LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."

    What is most valuable?

    The support is very good. They have excellent community support.

    The pricing is pretty good.

    The stability is okay. 

    What needs improvement?

    There are still some glitches that they need to improve. We have given support feedback as well when we have some issues. They're very responsive and they do work to fix and improve issues. 

    LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've used the solution for five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We do occasionally deal with glitches. The previous versions are very stable. The newer versions have some glitches and sometimes it hangs, however, for the most part, it's okay.

    There are issues around some protocol settings, like when we use encryption. When a person uses the banking application, the user and password are encrypted. We have issues with the encryption protocol. Lately, some settings may have changed and it seems to be working.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    While it's a good solution, I cannot speak to the scalability.

    How are customer service and support?

    The community support is good. Whenever we have an issue, they provide support to resolve it. If we need information about features, they help. Support is very good.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We use the solution as projects demand. We are a consulting company. Whatever the client has already purchased, we will use that. We work with all kinds of tools.

    What was our ROI?

    I don't have any details related to ROI.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I'm not exactly sure what the pricing is as it differs from client to client.

    That said, LoadRunner is expensive and NeoLoad is less expensive whereas JMeter is free.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I'm familiar, for example, with LoadRunner. When you compare this with Load Runner, Load Runner is the best tool as it, number one, is very user-friendly when compared with the NeoLoad. It also supports the protocols. It is very mature, so people are very comfortable with it. The monitoring is good, and it has a lot of good features.

    NeoLoad will not support all the protocols and it's not as user-friendly as LoadRunner. I use LoadRunner more than NeoLoad, and therefore am more comfortable with it.

    I also am familiar with JMeter, which is an open-source option and therefore a free tool. In comparison, NeoLoad is a big tool and JMeter is quite small. With NeoLoad, you can get all kinds of reports, flexible reports and you can customize the reports as well. We can drill down on the reports if we want. That's not possible in JMeter.

    What other advice do I have?

    NeoLoad is a good tool for banking or telecom applications. When compared with the LoadRunner, NeoLoad will support almost all necessary features including reporting. It is a good tool.

    Overall, I would rate the solution at a six out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Abishek Kota - PeerSpot reviewer
    Deputy Manager at BSH
    Real User
    Top 20
    Reliable and easy to use but has limited code
    Pros and Cons
    • "It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
    • "We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."

    What is our primary use case?

    I am a senior performance engineer providing end-to-end performance testing. This involves gathering all non-functional requirements, creating a test plan, and creating a test strategy document. From there, we would start our benchmark and baseline testing based on the tool and protocol of the specific client in order to gather the scripting and the load testing. NeoLoad helps us identify bottlenecks and memory leaks which will help us increase the hardware capacity for the client and/or look at things on the software end including scalability, reliability, testing, and failure testing.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing.

    What is most valuable?

    Each of the main components - design, runtime, and results - are unique in their own way.

    The design offers four components: user part (which is where we would be creating and enhancing scripts while implementing things like pacing, think time, and error handling concepts), servers (which is where we have the service testing of API testing), population (which is where we can plug scripts, create multiple populations, and perform bandwidth testing), and monitors (which is a server-side where we can add credentials to a database or server via SSH details).

    Runtime allows us to create scenarios, populations, low variation policies, load generators, and custom load profiles. Other functions include graphs, templates, check alerts, set alerts, check response time, etc.

    The results tab provides us with the NeoLoad report which we can segregate.

    What needs improvement?

    We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols.

    Testing can also be a little tricky at times.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this tool for almost nine years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This tool is easy to use. It requires little code implementation thanks to many predefined areas. I have not experienced any stability issues over the past nine years I have been using it.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I would rate the stability as five out of five. Right now we have about 500 users but in the past, we have had roughly 200k. They range from senior performance engineers to performance architects to performance test engineers.

    How are customer service and support?

    Customer service is fantastic. I have been working with one customer service rep for the past nine years. 

    How was the initial setup?

    Initial installation, registration, and setup were all straightforward and very easy, especially in comparison to other tools.

    What about the implementation team?

    We were able to implement the tool with our in-house team.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We were able to set up per user basis licensing.

    What other advice do I have?

    Newer additions such as NeoLoad SAP, Citrix, NeoLoad Web, etc. are excellent extensions with a broad range of new functions.

    Organizations should be aware that there are limited videos available on the internet regarding NeoLoad so they should ensure that they receive proper training from the reseller/integrator upon purchase. 

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Senior Manager Test Automation at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts
    Real User
    Simple implementation, helpful support, and priced well
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
    • "Tricentis NeoLoad could improve the terminal emulation mainframe. It is not able to use the low code or no code option. You have to code it yourself."

    What is our primary use case?

    We had three specific use cases we targeted Tricentis NeoLoad for. The first was for services, the second for terminal emulation mainframe applications, and the third was for the web.  We are looking for a more cost effective, efficient (low code) alternative to our current framework. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    Tricentis provides great documentation and collaboration.

    What is most valuable?

    The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was the low/no code for the web.

    What needs improvement?

    Tricentis NeoLoad could improve the range of codeless scripting such as with terminal emulation apps. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We did a trial of Tricentis NeoLoad for approximately three months.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Tricentis NeoLoad is a stable solution.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We did not have any problems with the scalability of Tricentis NeoLoad but did not fully push the product.  We have approximately six or seven people involved in the POC. This included senior engineers and test developers.

    We do not plan to expand the use of this solution at this time because it does not meet all of our needs.  Would consider a second look in the future.

    How are customer service and support?

    The technical support from Tricentis NeoLoad is very helpful.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We have used Micro Focus LoadRunner. However, it is expensive and there appears to be a declining number of users.  Tricentis NeoLoad is more affordable and would better enable our pipeline but has fewer features.  We are not in a hurry to change but will continue to review products of interest and will continue monitoring Tricentis product roadmap.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup of Tricentis NeoLoad was straightforward. We had the installation instructions and the packages, and it took us approximately four hours to complete.

    What about the implementation team?

    We did the implementation in-house.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Tricentis NeoLoad price is a benefit of using this tool, it is less expensive than some of the other solutions.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would encourage others to take a look at this solution. It is a good solution and they maintain the technical expertise needed for success.

    I rate Tricentis NeoLoad an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Private Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Director, IT DevOps & Quality Engineering at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Flexible to use and straightforward to implement
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
    • "Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use this tool for load testing on web-browser based APIs.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to.

    What needs improvement?

    The price of this solution could be reduced to make it more competitive.

    We would like to see more focus on support for other types of endpoints. Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using NeoLoad for about six months.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We have experienced no issues in terms of stability.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability has not been a problem for what we use.

    There are probably five users, including performance engineers and performance architects. It is only being used in one portfolio area right now, but we plan to expand our usage.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I don't have any experience with technical support.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We are currently using RadView WebLOAD in addition to Neotys NeoLoad. I am in the process of determining whether we should standardize on one tool, and choosing the one that makes the most sense, or continue to use both of them. 

    The reason we started working with NeoLoad is that it was a carryover from another site that I was working on. I was looking to see if there was an opportunity.

    The subscription pricing of NeoLoad is higher than RadView WebLOAD.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward. Integration with our environment was seamless.

    Maintenance is minimal and can be done with one person.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based.

    What other advice do I have?

    My advice to anybody who is implementing NeoLoad is to first understand the technical requirements. Also, it is important to make sure that you have access to the endpoints that you want to load-test on.

    Overall, it seems like a good product.

    I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Anuradha Mankhair - PeerSpot reviewer
    Automation Test Engineer and Team Lead at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Simple front end and good UI; skilled technical support was lacking
    Pros and Cons
    • "Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
    • "Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."

    What is our primary use case?

    We were customers of NeoLoad and I'm an automation test engineer and team lead.

    What is most valuable?

    I do like this tool, it's very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good. It's also simple for anyone who doesn't have a technical or coding background. I liked that we could record the script and use it multiple times. 

    What needs improvement?

    Our issues with the solution were related to the license and the support. We had a technical issue related to our software and they weren't able to solve the problem. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We used this solution for 18 months. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    I don't find this to be such a stable product because our requirements mean we need to be able to change the script on a monthly and sometimes weekly basis.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The support is not great - they don't respond in a timely way. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We purchased a two-year license but broke the contract after 18 months. 

    What other advice do I have?

    We're currently looking for a NeoLoad alternative. I prefer dynamic tools because we should be able to change the script and NeoLoad didn't allow us to do that. I'm looking for a tool that will allow for a weekly or monthly script change and provide us with the ability to update whatever has been recorded. 

    I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Tricentis NeoLoad Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: April 2022
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Tricentis NeoLoad Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.