We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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."I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this."
"Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting."
"The solution supports a number of protocols."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains."
"This product is better oriented to large, enterprise-oriented organizations."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"NeoLoad offers better reporting than most competing tools. It is effortless to analyze and measure the reported data. It's also simple to generate a report that most people can read and management can understand. NeoLoad helps you figure out the main issues inside the application."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."
"The solution is expensive."
"Integration can be tricky during the setup process."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"The UI lacks sufficient object rendering."
"Some users may find NeoLoad too technical, while other users may prefer a scripting language instead of a UI with figures and forms they have to fill in."
"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."
"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."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"The product is expensive."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and k6 Open Source. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.