We performed a comparison between Tricentis Flood and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Load Testing Tools."You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"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."
"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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"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."
"There were some features that were lacking in Tricentis NeoLoad, e.g. those were more into Citrix and other complicated protocols, which were supported easily by a competitor: Micro Focus LoadRunner. We also need to look into how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now."
"The SAP 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."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
Tricentis Flood is ranked 18th in Load Testing Tools while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 2nd in Load Testing Tools with 62 reviews. Tricentis Flood is rated 7.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Tricentis Flood writes "Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". Tricentis Flood is most compared with BlazeMeter, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.