We performed a comparison between SmartBear LoadNinja 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."It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"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."
"The dashboards give extensive statistics, which help with quick report preparation and analysis."
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"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."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"It needs time to mature."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"The product is expensive."
"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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
SmartBear LoadNinja is ranked 14th in Performance Testing Tools with 3 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. SmartBear LoadNinja is rated 7.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of SmartBear LoadNinja writes "Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". SmartBear LoadNinja is most compared with Apache JMeter, ReadyAPI Performance, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and Selenium HQ, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and BlazeMeter. See our SmartBear LoadNinja 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.