We performed a comparison between Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and Tricentis NeoLoad based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Tricentis NeoLoad offers seamless capturing of scripting and dynamic variables. Users are able to scale up quickly. A user favorite feature is the ability to generate loads from different geographies easily. Users recommend improving its integration with third-party tools. Currently, the integration process is complex and time-consuming.
Comparison Results: When selecting a Performance Testing Solution for an organization, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional finishes ahead of Tricentis NeoLoad. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional supports numerous protocols and applications and is very user-friendly. The solution is continually updating to ensure users get the best possible experience possible every time. Users consistently feel Tricentis NeoLoad should support more protocols to be more competitive with other solutions. They also related that testing could be a bit buggy at times, which adds to the solution being less desirable.
"It is an advanced tool with multiple options available for the performance system."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"My favorite feature in LoadRunner Professional is its ability to group scripts under separate IDs."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"The solution is quite stable."
"The stability is okay."
"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."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"NeoLoad is actually really good, mainly because they have a world-class support service."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
"I like the solution’s performance and integration. Also, the tool’s help center is very responsive and helpful. They have always helped me within a short duration of time."
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
"LoadRunner Professional's parameter data could be improved."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"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."
"Connecting with the solution's technical support can be time-consuming. The turnaround time for a ticket raised is around 72 hours, which becomes an issue when working on a huge project in our company."
"The solution’s pricing is higher compared to other tools. Though the product’s reports are accurate, it needs to be more detailed like other tools."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 61 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". 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". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter, IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Flood. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional 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.