We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI 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 can scale."
"We find the product to be scalable."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"It is very slow sometimes."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."
"The solution can be improved by introducing a secure testing feature."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"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."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"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."
ReadyAPI Performance is ranked 10th in Performance Testing Tools with 7 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. ReadyAPI Performance is rated 8.2, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ReadyAPI Performance writes "Straightforward to install with the ability to add multiple assertions but the price is too high". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". ReadyAPI Performance is most compared with SmartBear LoadNinja and Apache JMeter, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and BlazeMeter. See our ReadyAPI Performance 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.