We performed a comparison between Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and Tricentis NeoLoad based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Tricentis NeoLoad offers seamless capturing of scripting and dynamic variables. Users are able to scale up quickly. A user favorite feature is the ability to generate loads from different geographies easily. Users recommend improving its integration with third-party tools. Currently, the integration process is complex and time-consuming.
Comparison Results: When selecting a Performance Testing Solution for an organization, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional finishes ahead of Tricentis NeoLoad. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional supports numerous protocols and applications and is very user-friendly. The solution is continually updating to ensure users get the best possible experience possible every time. Users consistently feel Tricentis NeoLoad should support more protocols to be more competitive with other solutions. They also related that testing could be a bit buggy at times, which adds to the solution being less desirable.
"LoadRunner Professional allowed us to load test potential new payroll solutions that would be implemented throughout the entire organization so that we knew which was best suited to performing well under pressure."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"The solution helps my clients save time. It is easier to capture reports and improves product quality. The product helps to identify customer defects during performance tests and reduces workloads. The product has improved my client's user interaction. It has reduced peak load times."
"Simple capturing of dynamic variables and simple scripting."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"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."
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"The pricing model, selling model, and business model need to be adjusted. For non-enterprise organizations, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is too expensive and not worth the cost."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional can improve the implementation of digital areas, such as digital testing, UI and native application, and native mobile applications."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"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."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"Sometimes it's complicated to maintain the test cases. It's much easier than in JMeter, however. I'm not sure if this depends so much on NeoLoad, or is more based on the environment that we are testing."
"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."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"The product is expensive."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 59 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Supports SAP and non-SAP applications and helps identify performance issues before production deployment". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter, IBM Rational Performance Tester and BlazeMeter, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Flood. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional 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.