We compared Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad both excel in load testing capabilities and robust reporting features. Apache JMeter offers more extensive customization options and protocol support, while Tricentis NeoLoad is praised for its ease of use and superior customer service. Users suggest that Apache JMeter could improve its user interface and documentation, while Tricentis NeoLoad users desire better integration options and software stability.
Features: The valuable features of Apache JMeter include its versatility in load testing, robust reports and graphs for analysis, excellent support for various protocols, a user-friendly interface, and extensive customization options. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad offers ease of use, intuitive interface, excellent support for load testing and performance monitoring, advanced reporting capabilities, seamless integration with other tools, and efficient handling of complex and large-scale tests.
Pricing and ROI: According to user feedback, the setup cost for Apache JMeter is not mentioned, indicating a smooth and hassle-free process. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad also has a straightforward setup and the pricing is considered reasonable. Both products have easy-to-understand licensing processes., Apache JMeter demonstrated positive outcomes for return on investment, including improved testing processes and cost savings. Tricentis NeoLoad also provided a favorable return on investment, adding value to businesses.
Room for Improvement: In terms of room for improvement, Apache JMeter could benefit from enhancements in its user interface and documentation, particularly for beginners. On the other hand, Tricentis NeoLoad could use improvements in various areas including documentation, user interface design, integration options, and software stability.
Deployment and customer support: Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad have different user reviews regarding the duration required for establishing a new tech solution. Apache JMeter users mentioned three months for deployment and a week for setup, while Tricentis NeoLoad users mentioned three months for deployment and one week for setup or one week for both deployment and setup., Apache JMeter's customer service is praised for being helpful, reliable, and responsive. Customers appreciate their knowledge and prompt responses. Tricentis NeoLoad's customer service is commended for its promptness, professionalism, and efficient query resolution. Users are satisfied with the level of assistance received.
The summary above is based on 66 interviews we conducted recently with Apache JMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It gives accurate results and recommendations that we can implement to enhance the performance of websites."
"The solution is free. You don't need to worry about licensing costs."
"The reports and analysis tools are very good. They are the solution's most valuable features."
"Apache JMeter is stable."
"The thread groups, samplers, and listeners, which are all determined by the script's requirements, are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"We are using it just for load testing. We are using its free version, and it is scalable."
"It is an open-source tool that is easy to use. It can be easily integrated with multiple tools, including Selenium."
"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 best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"Simple capturing of dynamic variables and simple scripting."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"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."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"JMeter's reporting is extremely rudimentary. The fundamental reporting mechanisms need to be drastically improved. It doesn't utilize an automatic session management mechanism or methods other tools use like parsing cookies and variables. Everything needs to be done manually. There's no automation."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner we can go from the UI and we can configure it. There is no such feature in Apache JMeter. There should be UI-based recording history or logs."
"The UI could be better."
"In terms of platform support, they need to extend the support for backend platforms and more of the legacy types of platforms."
"JMeter should be more stable. Every time there is a new release coming up, a lot of its older functionalities or the new functionalities that are brought in are not very well-documented. It should be documented properly, and there should be proper use cases."
"The tool needs to have a better Graphical User Interface. Many of the solution's features are difficult to understand due to the complex user interface and user experience. The product needs to add plugins. It should also work on the integration with external partners like IDE and API gateways."
"The solution could use some sort of educational features to offer tips and hints to help users navigate it better. They should improve the manuals and help files."
"We're like the solution to be more user-friendly."
"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."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"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."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Katalon Studio and ReadyAPI, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Flood. See our Apache JMeter 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.