We performed a comparison between Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and Tricentis NeoLoad based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Tricentis NeoLoad offers seamless capturing of scripting and dynamic variables. Users are able to scale up quickly. A user favorite feature is the ability to generate loads from different geographies easily. Users recommend improving its integration with third-party tools. Currently, the integration process is complex and time-consuming.
Comparison Results: When selecting a Performance Testing Solution for an organization, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional finishes ahead of Tricentis NeoLoad. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional supports numerous protocols and applications and is very user-friendly. The solution is continually updating to ensure users get the best possible experience possible every time. Users consistently feel Tricentis NeoLoad should support more protocols to be more competitive with other solutions. They also related that testing could be a bit buggy at times, which adds to the solution being less desirable.
"I think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful."
"It has features for recording. The best feature with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is that there is very little bottleneck or overhead issues. With LoadRunner, you can spawn 2000 contributions for one machine."
"I like LoadRunner's ability to use multiple protocols. That's one of the greatest features along with the ability to test service calls between the app and server."
"Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"NeoLoad is actually really good, mainly because they have a world-class support service."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
"There's a reporting part of the cloud that could be improved a little bit."
"The technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future."
"Sometimes, we aren't able to see an accurate page view while replying and executing the script. When you are navigating the application side by side, it needs to be displayed on a random viewer. Sometimes we will get a few applications, and we won't get others."
"The pricing model, selling model, and business model need to be adjusted. For non-enterprise organizations, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is too expensive and not worth the cost."
"Compared to some other vendors, there is a lack of community support."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"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."
"The solution’s pricing is higher compared to other tools. Though the product’s reports are accurate, it needs to be more detailed like other tools."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"We would like to see the addition of one-to-one integrations with the Tricentis Tosca suite to this product, which would then cover the end-to-end needs of our customers who are looking for a single vendor solution."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"The solution can be improved by introducing a secure testing feature."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 59 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". 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 Professional is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter, IBM Rational Performance Tester and BlazeMeter, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Flood. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional 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.