We performed a comparison between k6 Open Source and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools."The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"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."
"NeoLoad offers better reporting than most competing tools. It is effortless to analyze and measure the reported data. It's also simple to generate a report that most people can read and management can understand. NeoLoad helps you figure out the main issues inside the application."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
"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."
"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"The product is expensive."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"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."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
k6 Open Source is ranked 17th in Load Testing Tools with 1 review while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Load Testing Tools with 59 reviews. k6 Open Source is rated 7.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of k6 Open Source writes "Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Supports SAP and non-SAP applications and helps identify performance issues before production deployment". k6 Open Source is most compared with Apache JMeter, Akamai CloudTest and RadView WebLOAD, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and IBM Rational Performance Tester.
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.