We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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."This is a product that has a lot of capabilities and is the most mature tool of its kind in the market."
"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"We haven't had an outage since we started using the solution."
"We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center."
"The most valuable feature is the Vuser protocols."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"I like how you can make modifications to the script on LoadRunner Enterprise. You don't have to go into the IDE itself."
"This product is better oriented to large, enterprise-oriented organizations."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The dashboards give extensive statistics, which help with quick report preparation and analysis."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"When we have a new application, recording the application is a pretty tough task. We have tried multiple things. We do scripting or try to record with different settings and on different machines. We try to record multiple times, but we do not know why it is recording and why it is not recording. We do the same thing on different machines. It sometimes records, and at other times, it does not. That is one of the major concerns."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"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."
"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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and RadView WebLOAD. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
