We performed a comparison between Original Software Qualify and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."Flexible software with multiple functions, e.g. scenario deployment, new entity creation, workflow creation, etc. Technical support for this software is very good."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis NeoLoad for us has been its ability to easily monitor all the load generators and configure the dynamics and data rates. Additionally, we can monitor individual loads and data directly within NeoLoad without needing third-party tools."
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"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."
"The reporting engine of Original Software Qualify AQM needs to change. It's very difficult to develop complex reports. Its reporting function needs improvement."
"It would be good to make some updates on the reporting side."
"There were some features that were lacking in Tricentis NeoLoad, e.g. those were more into Citrix and other complicated protocols, which were supported easily by a competitor: Micro Focus LoadRunner. We also need to look into how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"Connecting with the solution's technical support can be time-consuming. The turnaround time for a ticket raised is around 72 hours, which becomes an issue when working on a huge project in our company."
"Some users may find NeoLoad too technical, while other users may prefer a scripting language instead of a UI with figures and forms they have to fill in."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
Earn 20 points
Original Software Qualify is ranked 35th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 59 reviews. Original Software Qualify is rated 9.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Original Software Qualify writes "Flexible, multifunctional, and stable testing software with good technical support". 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". Original Software Qualify is most compared with , whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and BlazeMeter.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.