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 solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"The stability is good."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that BlazeMeter provides easy access to its users while also ensuring that its reporting functionalities are good."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"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."
"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."
"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"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 most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"One problem, while we are executing a test, is that it will take some time to download data. Let's say I'm performance testing with a high-end load configuration. It takes a minimum of three minutes or so to start the test itself. That's the bad part of the performance testing... every time I rerun the same test, it is downloaded again... That means I have to wait for three to four minutes again."
"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."
"The seamless integration with mobiles could be improved."
"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."
"We encountered some minor bugs, and I would like to have the ability to add load generators to workspaces without having to use APIs. We can't do that now, so we're beholden to the APIs."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"Connecting with the solution's technical support can be time-consuming. The turnaround time for a ticket raised is around 72 hours, which becomes an issue when working on a huge project in our company."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"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 is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"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."
"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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
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.
