We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The solution does support a wide range of technologies and protocols. Plus, two features, network virtualization, and service virtualization, are really helpful. Apart from that, the way they have their billing scenarios, like the execution, is very good."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting."
"We can book load generators."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"We haven't had an outage since we started using the solution."
"This product is better oriented to large, enterprise-oriented organizations."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."
"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us."
"A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard. For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user. Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"There is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"Tricentis NeoLoad could improve the terminal emulation mainframe. It is not able to use the low code or no code option. You have to code it yourself."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"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 OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 58 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". 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". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and RadView WebLOAD. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
