We performed a comparison between Eggplant Performance and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We don't have a big team of people that can watch the dials and check that everything is okay. We're doing a lot of the monitoring of our website and our product at the side of the desk. We need a solution that does a lot for us, and that's what Eggplant does."
"We find the solution stable and scalable."
"It is not a conventional test automation tool. It uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify objects. It makes it the best in the class."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"NeoLoad is actually really good, mainly because they have a world-class support service."
"The stability is okay."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used."
"I'd like to see the ability to integrate the user experience through device forms like AWS device forms or source labs."
"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."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"There is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"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."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
Eggplant Performance is ranked 15th in Performance Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. Eggplant Performance is rated 7.8, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Eggplant Performance writes "Offers unique object identification, ideal for UI layer regression automation but limited scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". Eggplant Performance is most compared with Appium, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, Tricentis Tosca and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and Tricentis Tosca. See our Eggplant Performance vs. Tricentis NeoLoad report.
See our list of best Performance 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.