We performed a comparison between Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing and RadView WebLOAD 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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"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."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
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 RadView WebLOAD is ranked 9th in Load Testing Tools with 9 reviews. Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is rated 9.0, while RadView WebLOAD is rated 8.2. 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 RadView WebLOAD writes "IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated". Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is most compared with Apache JMeter, whereas RadView WebLOAD is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and k6 Open Source.
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.