Selenium HQ vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
SeleniumHQ Logo
5,363 views|4,586 comparisons
Tricentis Logo
8,357 views|4,256 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.""The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer.""The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior.""The most valuable features are the ability to test and debug.""Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop.""It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium.""The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures.""Ability to integrate with every other tool."

More Selenium HQ Pros →

"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side.""The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support.""From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest.""It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty.""We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience.""The solution's setup was straightforward.""The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to.""The dashboards give extensive statistics, which help with quick report preparation and analysis."

More Tricentis NeoLoad Pros →

Cons
"​To simplify the development process, everyone needs to do a Selenium Framework to acquire the web application functions and features from Selenium methods.""Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%.""Handling frames and windows needs to be improved.""Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear.""Selenium Grid set-up is bit complex.""It would be better if it accommodated non-techy end-users. I think it's still a product for developers. That's why it's not common for end-users, and especially for RPA activities or tasks. It's hard to automate tasks for end-users. If it will be easier, more user-friendly, and so on, perhaps it can be more interesting for this kind of user.""The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem.""Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code."

More Selenium HQ Cons →

"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us.""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.""Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup.""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.""It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup.""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.""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.""Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."

More Tricentis NeoLoad Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is free to use."
  • "There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
  • "It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
  • "Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
  • "It is free."
  • "This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
  • "We are satisfied with the pricing."
  • "It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
  • More Selenium HQ Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
  • "The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
  • "It is cheaper than other solutions."
  • "The licensing cost is less compared to other licensing performance testing tools."
  • "Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
  • "Its licensing cost is very less."
  • "NeoLoad is cheaper compared to other solutions. There are no additional licensing fees."
  • "Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
  • More Tricentis NeoLoad Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Comparison Review
    Anonymous User
    The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and LoadRunner. I consulted a variety of sources, including user groups, discussions with colleagues, telephone chats with HP (the vendors of LoadRunner) and Neotys (the vendors of NeoLoad), and of course the Oracle – Google. The opinions in this article are my own and do not represent the views of any particular company, the software vendors or any organisation (and I’ve assumed that readers have some knowledge of web application performance testing). The versions discussed in this article as of April 2014 are: LoadRunner 11.52 NeoLoad 4.2.2 I hope this evaluation and comparison will assist you with your own evaluation of LoadRunner and NeoLoad. Introduction LoadRunner and NeoLoad are considered the top two best performance testing tools on the market. Comparing the two tools is just like comparing a Mercedes Benz and a BMW: both are high performance, perfectly engineered machines that also have an associated prestige. Performance testing is a critical component of the software testing process. It determines the actual operational boundaries that will simulate the real world use of an application. Performance testing is load testing, stress testing and scalability testing. Why… Read more →
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate… more »
    Top Answer:Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
    Top Answer:I highly recommend Tricentis NeoLoad for companies that are in need of a versatile load and performance testing tool. This relatively inexpensive solution is recognized by organizations like Oxford… more »
    Top Answer:What I found best in Tricentis NeoLoad is that it's better with scripting and load test execution in the load testing environment compared to its competitors. The tool has a better design, scenarios… more »
    Top Answer:I don't have information on the licensing cost of Tricentis NeoLoad because my manager handles that. From a testing perspective and based on company requirements, the current license is for one… more »
    Ranking
    4th
    Views
    5,363
    Comparisons
    4,586
    Reviews
    33
    Average Words per Review
    410
    Rating
    8.1
    Views
    8,357
    Comparisons
    4,256
    Reviews
    18
    Average Words per Review
    539
    Rating
    7.9
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    SeleniumHQ
    NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
    Learn More
    SeleniumHQ
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Selenium HQ is an umbrella project that includes a number of tools and frameworks that allow for web browser automation. In particular, Selenium offers a framework for the W3C WebDriver specification, a platform- and language-neutral coding interface that works with all of the main web browsers.

    Selenium is a toolset for automating web browsers that uses the best methods available to remotely control browser instances and simulate a user's interaction with the browser. It enables users to mimic typical end-user actions, such as typing text into forms, choosing options from drop-down menus, checking boxes, and clicking links in documents. Additionally, it offers a wide range of other controls, including mouse movement, arbitrary JavaScript execution, and much more.

    Although Selenium HQ is generally used for front-end website testing, it is also a browser user agent library. The interfaces are universal in their use, which enables composition with other libraries to serve your purpose.

    The source code for Selenium is accessible under the Apache 2.0 license. The project is made possible by volunteers who have kindly committed hundreds of hours to the development and maintenance of the code.

    Selenium HQ Tools

    These three main Selenium HQ tools have powerful capabilities:

    • WebDriver: If you are just starting out with desktop or mobile website test automation, you will be using WebDriver APIs. WebDriver controls the browser and executes tests using the automation APIs that browser vendors provide. This gives the impression that a real person is using the browser. Because WebDriver's API does not need to be compiled alongside application code, it is not intrusive. As a result, you can test the same application that you push live.

    • IDE: Develop your Selenium test cases using an IDE (integrated development environment). The most effective way to create test cases is to utilize this simple Chrome and Firefox extension. IDE uses Selenium commands that are already in use to record user activity in the browser with parameters set by the context of the element. This is an excellent approach to learning Selenium script syntax and will save you time.

    • Grid: You can run test cases on several machines and operating systems with Selenium Grid. The local end controls how the test cases are triggered, and the remote end automatically runs the test cases after they are triggered.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Selenium HQ stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its driver interface and its speed. PeerSpot users take note of the advantages of these features in their reviews:


    Avijit B., an automation tester at a tech services company, writes of the solution, “The driver interface is really useful. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application.”

    Another PeerSpot reviewer, a software engineer at a financial services firm, notes, “Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop."

    Tricentis NeoLoad is a performance testing tool that provides developers and testers with automatic test design, test maintenance, realistic simulation of user behavior, fast root cause analysis, and built-in integrations with the entire SDLC toolchain. With NeoLoad’s plugins, teams can reuse and share test assets and results from functional testing tools, analytics, metrics, and APM tools in order to catch performance issues early. With NeoLoad’s full tech stack support, users can test the range of mobile, web, and desktop apps.

    Tricentis NeoLoad Features

    Tricentis NeoLoad has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

    • Supports API technologies 

      • Support for SOAP/REST.
      • Assisted design with Swagger/Open API import and highly efficient extractors for quick test design and fewer errors in scripting.
      • Ability to test as code or GUI-based productivity.

    • Automated testing of API performance

      • CI/CD automated API testing, dynamic load generation infrastructure, and auto pass/fail based on SLAs.
      • Real-time test results for fast dev feedback loop if bottleneck is found.
      • Non-regression API performance trends.
    • API-based applications 

      • Ability to test stand-alone APIs or APIs within end-to-end tests. Same platform, same skills.
      • Dev, PO, QA, Ops share a common view of API performance.
      • Confidence in API and application speed and reliability.

    • Design tests faster and update automatically

      • Assisted design using wizards and automatic parameter handling.
      • Reuse functional scripts and/or convert LoadRunner scripts to NeoLoad performance tests.
      • Update system-level scripts quicker with automatic user path updates.
      • Easy to reuse and maintain.

    • Realistic user simulation

      • Simulate any business case.
      • Scale load tests with up to millions of virtual users.

    • Bottleneck identification

      • Real-time test analysis.
      • Pass/fail based on SLA.
      • Root cause analysis.

    Tricentis NeoLoad Benefits

    There are many benefits to implementing Tricentis NeoLoad. Some of the biggest advantages the solution offers include:

    • Automate API testing within CI pipelines: Design, maintain, and run performance tests. Analyze results within continuous integration pipelines.
    • Accelerate end-to-end app testing: Create test scripts fast for complex applications using a graphical user interface without the complexity of scripting new and updated tests.
    • Find performance bottlenecks fast: Compare SLAs to server-level statistics to measure how an application is performing. See overall analysis of behavior or an analysis of the data flow to a particular user path.
    • Manage across the enterprise: Collaborate across QA, operations, dev, and business teams to define SLAs and review results. Share test results and manage test infrastructure. Schedule and share resources across teams and apps.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Tricentis NeoLoad stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Some of these include its price, its user-friendly UX, its API support, and its scalability. PeerSpot users take note of the advantages of these features in their reviews:

    Patrik B., Technical Lead at a tech services company, writes, “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.”

    A Global Delivery Head at a consultancy firm notes, “The API support is much better with this solution, compared with the competition. Pricing for it is also more affordable than its competitor. We have used Tricentis NeoLoad and we find it scalable.”

    Sample Customers
    BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
    Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm25%
    Computer Software Company22%
    Retailer10%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Government7%
    REVIEWERS
    Retailer15%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Government12%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization43%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise68%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise74%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business10%
    Midsize Enterprise49%
    Large Enterprise42%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 57 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". 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". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Telerik Test Studio, Worksoft Certify, Tricentis Tosca and OpenText Silk Test, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Tosca.

    We monitor all Functional 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.