We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"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. I didn't have to search Google or watch YouTube videos. In just 15 to 20 minutes, I was able to understand the tool."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"The stability is okay."
"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."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
"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."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"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."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"Its licensing cost is very less."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
TestComplete is a powerful and robust automated testing tool for mobile, web and desktop applications. Quickly and easily create accurate and repeatable tests across multiple devices, platforms and environments – regardless of experience level. It supports multiple languages, modern control sets and integrates with open source frameworks and tools like Selenium, SoapUI and Jenkins.
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.
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 3rd in Test Automation Tools with 13 reviews while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 8.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "Speed, configuration consistency, and accuracy of tests with fantastic results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Good licensing cost, user-friendly, and makes it easy and quick to create scripts". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Micro Focus UFT One, Ranorex Studio and Appium, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, Tricentis Flood, BlazeMeter and Selenium HQ.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.