We performed a comparison between Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing and Tricentis Flood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools."The pricing is reasonable."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"A lot of time you start the stress testing, and you sign the log in again, and I want to get rid of that. It's just not clear to me how to do it yet."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
More Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is ranked 16th in Load Testing Tools with 3 reviews while Tricentis Flood is ranked 18th in Load Testing Tools. Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is rated 9.0, while Tricentis Flood is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing writes "User-friendly, cheap, and quick to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Flood writes "Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options". Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is most compared with Apache JMeter, whereas Tricentis Flood is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, BlazeMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud.
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.