We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"The stability is okay."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"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."
"The licensing cost is very less for NeoLoad. It is user-friendly and easy to understand because they have created so many useful functionalities. When I started working with this tool, we just had to do the initial assessment about whether this tool will be able to support our daily work or not. I could easily understand it. I didn't have to search Google or watch YouTube videos. In just 15 to 20 minutes, I was able to understand the tool."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"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."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"LoadRunner supports multiple protocols, whereas NeoLoad supports only three protocols. With NeoLoad, we can go for the SAP technology, web-based HTTP, and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP). If I have to simulate .NET application-based traffic, I won't be able to do that. So, protocol support is a limitation for NeoLoad. It should support more protocols."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"Its licensing cost is very less."
Earn 20 points
Cavisson NetStorm is a cost-effective, performance enhancing and easy-to-use appliance for enterprise applications. It is an extremely powerful load generator that provides an accurate estimation of Client Perceived Response Time (CPRT) enabling IT companies to guarantee the Service Level Agreements (SLA). Its advanced technology efficiently handles load variables, user realism, application realism and network realism. NetStorm is a proven solution providing root cause of the issues where legacy solutions failed, prompting Several Fortune 100 companies switching over to using NetStorm.
The NeoLoad load and performance testing tool for web and mobile apps realistically simulates user activity and monitors infrastructure behavior to eliminate bottlenecks. It covers all performance testing from component and automated tests to system-wide hybrid-cloud load tests.
Cavisson NetStorm is ranked 6th in Load Testing Tools with 2 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 5th in Load Testing Tools with 6 reviews. Cavisson NetStorm is rated 9.6, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cavisson NetStorm writes "Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Good licensing cost, user-friendly, and makes it easy and quick to create scripts". Cavisson NetStorm is most compared with Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, Tricentis Flood, BlazeMeter and Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. See our Cavisson NetStorm vs. Tricentis NeoLoad report.
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.