We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds the on-premises hosting solutions, so we have implemented a hybrid approach. BlazeMeter sets us up for our traditional hosting platforms and application stack as well as the modern cloud-based or SaaS-based application technologies."
"In our company, various teams use BlazeMeter, particularly appreciating its cloud license software, which supports up to 5,000 users. BlazeMeter's cloud capabilities allow us to load test or simulate traffic from any location worldwide, such as Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and even specific cities like Delhi. So, with one cloud license, we can simulate user load from various locations globally."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"For me, the best part is that we can graphically see the test result at runtime. It helps us understand the behavior of the application during all stages of the test."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The feature that stands out the most is their action groups. They act like functions or methods and code, allowing us to reuse portions of our tests. That also means we have a single point for maintenance when updates are required. Instead of updating a hundred different test cases, we update one action group, and the test cases using that action group will update."
"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."
"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 scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"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."
"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."
"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."
"BlazeMeter needs more granular access control. Currently, BlazeMeter controls everything at a workspace level, so a user can view or modify anything inside that workspace depending on their role. It would be nice if there was a more granular control where you could say, "This person can only do A, B, and C," or, "This user only has access to functional testing. This user only has access to mock services." That feature set doesn't currently exist."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"Version controlling of the test cases and the information, the ability to compare the current version and the previous version within Runscope would be really nice. The history shows who made the changes, but it doesn't compare the changes."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"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."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"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."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BrowserStack and Perfecto, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and Tricentis Flood. See our BlazeMeter 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.
