We performed a comparison between RadView WebLOAD and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"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 stability is okay."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"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."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"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."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
"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."
"The solution can be improved by introducing a secure testing feature."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
RadView WebLOAD is ranked 11th in Performance Testing Tools with 9 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 59 reviews. RadView WebLOAD is rated 8.2, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of RadView WebLOAD writes "IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated". 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". RadView WebLOAD is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and k6 Open Source, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and Visual Studio Test Professional.
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.