We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"The product has many features."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"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."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"I didn't like much of the support that you get from the Tricentis group unless it was after it integrated with Tricentis; the support is not that good."
"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"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."
"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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"There is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 71 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 61 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and BlazeMeter.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.