We performed a comparison between k6 Open Source 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."The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."
"The tool's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"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."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"With the tool, it is possible to compare NeoLoad test results against baseline and benchmark, and we can make the comparisons in the same window."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."
"I didn't like much of the support that you get from the Tricentis group unless it was after it integrated with Tricentis; the support is not that good."
"The solution can be improved by introducing a secure testing feature."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"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."
k6 Open Source is ranked 17th in Load Testing Tools with 2 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 2nd in Load Testing Tools with 62 reviews. k6 Open Source is rated 7.6, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of k6 Open Source writes "Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". k6 Open Source is most compared with Apache JMeter, BlazeMeter, RadView WebLOAD and Akamai CloudTest, 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 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.