We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is picking up and entering values from web pages."
"The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple."
"Due to its popularity, you can find pretty much any answer in open discussions from the community."
"I am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
"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."
"The dashboards give extensive statistics, which help with quick report preparation and analysis."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"What I found best in Tricentis NeoLoad is that it's better with scripting and load test execution in the load testing environment compared to its competitors. The tool has a better design, scenarios, and model, which I find helpful. I also found the Result Manager a fascinating part of Tricentis NeoLoad because of the way it collates results and presents reports. The straightforward implementation of Tricentis NeoLoad, including ease of use, is also valuable to my team."
"With the tool, it is possible to compare NeoLoad test results against baseline and benchmark, and we can make the comparisons in the same window."
"We do not have enough resources or enough people to employ and hire. So, I'm hiring whoever I find, and they don't always have enough technical knowledge to operate Selenium."
"Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be."
"One limitation of Selenium is that it is purely focused on web application testing."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"Selenium could offer better ways to record and create scripts. IDE is available, however, it can be improved."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"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."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"We would like to see the addition of one-to-one integrations with the Tricentis Tosca suite to this product, which would then cover the end-to-end needs of our customers who are looking for a single vendor solution."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"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."
Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA), whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and BlazeMeter.
We monitor all Functional 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.