Ganganjaneya ThummalaDelivery Manager at cigniti
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting 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 most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"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."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"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."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"The licensing cost is less compared to other licensing performance testing tools."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
Earn 20 points
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.
Neotys NeoLoad is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 10th in Performance Testing Tools with 2 reviews. Neotys NeoLoad is rated 8.4, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Neotys NeoLoad writes "Easy to build test cases, good stability and good scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Doesn't require a separate management tool but it is lacking support ". Neotys NeoLoad is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, BlazeMeter, Tricentis Flood and Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, Micro Focus UFT One, Apache JMeter and Katalon Studio. See our Neotys NeoLoad vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.
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.