We compared Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad both excel in load testing capabilities and robust reporting features. Apache JMeter offers more extensive customization options and protocol support, while Tricentis NeoLoad is praised for its ease of use and superior customer service. Users suggest that Apache JMeter could improve its user interface and documentation, while Tricentis NeoLoad users desire better integration options and software stability.
Features: The valuable features of Apache JMeter include its versatility in load testing, robust reports and graphs for analysis, excellent support for various protocols, a user-friendly interface, and extensive customization options. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad offers ease of use, intuitive interface, excellent support for load testing and performance monitoring, advanced reporting capabilities, seamless integration with other tools, and efficient handling of complex and large-scale tests.
Pricing and ROI: According to user feedback, the setup cost for Apache JMeter is not mentioned, indicating a smooth and hassle-free process. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad also has a straightforward setup and the pricing is considered reasonable. Both products have easy-to-understand licensing processes., Apache JMeter demonstrated positive outcomes for return on investment, including improved testing processes and cost savings. Tricentis NeoLoad also provided a favorable return on investment, adding value to businesses.
Room for Improvement: In terms of room for improvement, Apache JMeter could benefit from enhancements in its user interface and documentation, particularly for beginners. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad could use improvements in various areas including documentation, user interface design, integration options, and software stability.
Deployment and customer support: Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad have different user reviews regarding the duration required for establishing a new tech solution. Apache JMeter users mentioned three months for deployment and a week for setup, while Tricentis NeoLoad users mentioned three months for deployment and one week for setup or one week for both deployment and setup., Apache JMeter's customer service is praised for being helpful, reliable, and responsive. Customers appreciate their knowledge and prompt responses. Tricentis NeoLoad's customer service is commended for its promptness, professionalism, and efficient query resolution. Users are satisfied with the level of assistance received.
The summary above is based on 66 interviews we conducted recently with Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"User-friendly and open source."
"The recording and playback functionality is helpful."
"It's very easy to install, and it's very easy to code and develop the script."
"It is very quick and user-friendly."
"We find the load testing feature valuable."
"JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process."
"We like that Apache JMeter has different features and different plugins and that they are free of charge."
"The solution is free. You don't need to worry about licensing costs."
"My company has a good experience with Tricentis NeoLoad, and what I like best about it is that it lets you generate loads from different geographies. The load generation agents getting placed on different geographies is a very good feature of the solution. I also like that you can scale up Tricentis NeoLoad very quickly. The general feedback on performance testing with Tricentis NeoLoad for all product lines within my company is good."
"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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"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."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"JMeter should be more stable. Every time there is a new release coming up, a lot of its older functionalities or the new functionalities that are brought in are not very well-documented. It should be documented properly, and there should be proper use cases."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"The solution is not user-friendly, there is no framework for autocorrelation or parameterization."
"The only thing is the learning curve. It's high."
"We're like the solution to be more user-friendly."
"Apache JMeter's UI can be made more colorful."
"There is some work to be done with the integration."
"The reporting is not very good."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its integration with third-party tools because, at the moment, it's a bit complicated. Per Tricentis, you can integrate Tricentis NeoLoad with different monitoring tools such as Dynatrace and New Relic, but that requires installing an additional tool to make that integration happen, rather than being able to pull in Tricentis NeoLoad from the different tools and servers, and make integration simpler and easier."
"It would be good to make some updates on the reporting side."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 60 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Offers good user interface, customization and I like how it way it correlates, monitors, and integrates with the user interface". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Katalon Studio, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and ReadyAPI, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Flood. See our Apache JMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.