Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Akamai CloudTest vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 2025
 

Categories and Ranking

Akamai CloudTest
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
10th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Vinod Patil - PeerSpot reviewer
Is user-friendly and offers live monitoring
Extending the same cloud tool to make it app native so that it can help with device performance testing towards HTTP requests and responses. If you can have a front-end tool like Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. If you have some integration with Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. I want the tool to have IP spoofing because whenever you do load testing, you will have a little bit of static IP based on a particular load generator. If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement. Having integration to APM tools, like Dynatrace or AppDynamics, the way we have in the load tools, would be good.
Sangeetha Alur - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good user interface, customization and I like how it way it correlates, monitors, and integrates with the user interface
I didn't like much of the support that you get from the Tricentis group unless it was after it integrated with Tricentis; the support is not that good. But earlier, the support was actually very wonderful. I started using NeoLoad right from 2011. So, there is room for improvement in customer service and support. It requires a lot of justification and a lot of emails that you need to send back and forth. But earlier, when I was working with Siemens, the integration of the NeoLoad team and Siemens team was very good, and the support was excellent. As soon as you raised a ticket, we had very good support, but that changed after Tricentis.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution is very stable."
"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."
"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."
"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."
"The tool is very user-friendly, so you can save a lot of time in terms of your preparation activities."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"The stability is okay."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
"I like the solution’s performance and integration. Also, the tool’s help center is very responsive and helpful. They have always helped me within a short duration of time."
"With the tool, it is possible to compare NeoLoad test results against baseline and benchmark, and we can make the comparisons in the same window."
"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."
 

Cons

"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."
"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."
"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."
"If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement."
"The test clip should be more user-friendly."
"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."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its integration with third-party tools because, at the moment, it's a bit complicated. Per Tricentis, you can integrate Tricentis NeoLoad with different monitoring tools such as Dynatrace and New Relic, but that requires installing an additional tool to make that integration happen, rather than being able to pull in Tricentis NeoLoad from the different tools and servers, and make integration simpler and easier."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"The solution can be improved by introducing a secure testing feature."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is at an intermediate level. When you compare it with other enterprise load testing tools, it falls under the average category."
"We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."
"Running cost is very low."
"From a licensing cost perspective, I rate the product an eight out of ten since it is a cheap solution that looks costly for certain areas."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."
"Pricing for Tricentis NeoLoad could be cheaper because, at the moment, it's expensive. For a year, the solution cost us a lot of money, in particular, more than $50,000."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
825,661 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
9%
Government
7%
Educational Organization
50%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Akamai CloudTest?
Extending the same cloud tool to make it app native so that it can help with device performance testing towards HTTP requests and responses. If you can have a front-end tool like Google's Core Web ...
What is your primary use case for Akamai CloudTest?
I use the solution in my company for load testing. You can say that it is used on the API and then for web page-level load testing.
What advice do you have for others considering Akamai CloudTest?
The tool's very first benefit is zero maintenance. You need not take care of your controller or load generator, so there is zero maintenance. The second benefit of the tool would be in the area of ...
Do you recommend Tricentis NeoLoad?
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...
What is your primary use case for Neotys NeoLoad?
Tricentis NeoLoad is a standard tool for testing from an application coverage and reporting aspect. At our company, the tool is primarily used for performance testing to calculate the user-handling...
What do you like most about Tricentis NeoLoad?
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 individu...
 

Also Known As

SOASTA CloudTest
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Chester Zoo
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai CloudTest vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
825,661 professionals have used our research since 2012.