We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud vs. Tricentis NeoLoad

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
552,695 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way.""The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I""The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center.""The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover.""The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it.""The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."

More Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud Pros »

"The stability is okay.""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 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 scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good.""The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."

More Tricentis NeoLoad Pros »

Cons
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud.""There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other.""Improvements to the reporting would be good.""We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD.""I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check.""I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."

More Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud Cons »

"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.""I would like to see support for auto-correlations.""Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue.""Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols.""LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all.""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."

More Tricentis NeoLoad Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use.""We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."

More Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Its licensing cost is very less.""Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."

More Tricentis NeoLoad Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
552,695 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and… more »
Top Answer: We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000. I don't think there are any additional costs to standard licensing.
Top Answer: Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud.
Top Answer: I'm not exactly sure what the pricing is as it differs from client to client. That said, LoadRunner is expensive and NeoLoad is less expensive whereas JMeter is free.
Top Answer: There are still some glitches that they need to improve. We have given support feedback as well when we have some issues. They're very responsive and they do work to fix and improve issues. LoadRunner… more »
Ranking
Views
5,229
Comparisons
3,565
Reviews
6
Average Words per Review
805
Rating
8.0
Views
6,328
Comparisons
3,720
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
500
Rating
8.2
Comparisons
Also Known As
StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
Learn More
Overview

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is a simple, smart and scalable cloud-based load and performance testing solution for agile and DevOps teams. It helps you to detect performance issues and ensure that your mobile and web apps are ready for the load. It provides an Intelligent and predictive analytics for fast problem detection and scale up to millions of user in minutes from different regions.

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.

Offer
Learn more about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud
Learn more about Tricentis NeoLoad
Sample Customers
Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Educational Organization40%
Financial Services Firm20%
Retailer20%
Engineering Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm9%
Energy/Utilities Company6%
REVIEWERS
Retailer18%
Government18%
Computer Software Company18%
Individual & Family Service12%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company34%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm8%
Government7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business17%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise58%
REVIEWERS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise76%
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
552,695 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews. Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enabled us to eliminate load generators, and automatically triggers and produces reports". 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". Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, BlazeMeter and Akamai CloudTest, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, Tricentis Flood, BlazeMeter and RadView WebLOAD. See our Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud 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.