BlazeMeter vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

Perforce and Tricentis are both solutions in the Performance Testing Tools category. Perforce is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Tricentis is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1. Perforce holds a 16.5% mindshare in PTT, compared to Tricentis’s 15.5% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Perforce users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

BlazeMeter

Read 47 BlazeMeter reviews

5,818 Views
3,328 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Tricentis NeoLoad

Read 64 Tricentis NeoLoad reviews

6,984 Views
3,575 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

BlazeMeter

Tricentis NeoLoad

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter 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.

To learn more, read our detailed BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report (Updated: November 2024).

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad

November 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 815,854 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

4th

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (6th), Test Automation Tools (5th)

Tricentis NeoLoad

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 16.5%, up from 13.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 15.5%, up from 15.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Performance Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Bala Maddu

Mobile Network Automation Architect at BT - British Telecom

Jul 17, 2022

Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases

Overall, it's helped our ability to address test data challenges. The test data features on their own are very good, but version control test data isn't included yet. I think that's an area for improvement. We can update the test data on the cloud. That's a good feature. There's also test data management, which is good. [Runscope] doesn't have the test data management yet. Mock services do, and performance testing has it. We can do the same test through JMeter, validating the same criteria, but the feedback from [Runscope] is quite visible. We can see the request and the response, what data comes back, and add the validation criteria. We can manage the test environments and test data, but running the same API request for multiple test data is missing. We cloned the test cases multiple times to run it. They need to work on that. Version controlling of the test cases and the information, the ability to compare the current version and the previous version within [Runscope] would be really nice. The history shows who made the changes, but it doesn't compare the changes. In the future, I would like to see integrations with GitLab and external Git reports so we could have some sort of version control outside as well. There is no current mechanism for that. The ability to have direct imports of spoken API specifications instead of converting them to JSON would be nice. There are some features they could work on.

Read full review

Sangeetha Alur

Principal Software Engineer at One Advanced

Apr 8, 2024

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution’s most valuable feature is the dashboard."

"The feature that stands out the most is their action groups. They act like functions or methods and code, allowing us to reuse portions of our tests. That also means we have a single point for maintenance when updates are required. Instead of updating a hundred different test cases, we update one action group, and the test cases using that action group will update."

"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."

"It's a great platform because it's a SaaS solution, but it also builds the on-premises hosting solutions, so we have implemented a hybrid approach. BlazeMeter sets us up for our traditional hosting platforms and application stack as well as the modern cloud-based or SaaS-based application technologies."

"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."

"It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."

"The user interface is good."

"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."

More BlazeMeter pros

"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."

"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."

"The solution's setup was straightforward."

"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."

"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."

"The solution is a UI-based tool, so it's easy to use because we don't have to do actual recording with it. This makes it easier to use, and, in terms of speed, it's a bit faster than other tools when it comes to scripting."

"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."

More Tricentis NeoLoad pros

Cons

"Sometimes, when we execute tests, the results calculated by BlazeMeter, specifically the response times for failed transactions, are incorrect."

"Having more options for customization would be helpful."

"The product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics."

"If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market."

"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."

"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."

"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."

"One problem, while we are executing a test, is that it will take some time to download data. Let's say I'm performance testing with a high-end load configuration. It takes a minimum of three minutes or so to start the test itself. That's the bad part of the performance testing... every time I rerun the same test, it is downloaded again... That means I have to wait for three to four minutes again."

More BlazeMeter cons

"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."

"The SAP area could be improved."

"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."

"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."

"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."

"If one person opens any script, another person won't be able to work on it simultaneously. If they can improve that feature, it would be helpful for everyone. I found that incorporating all the scripts into a single project was the challenging part. This is because we are working on different domains—I'm on one domain, and others are on another. We need to handle all these scripts cautiously."

"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."

More Tricentis NeoLoad cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."

"The overall product is less costly than our past solutions, so we've absolutely saved money."

"It's consumption-based pricing but with a ceiling. They're called CVUs, or consumption variable units. We can use API testing, GUI testing, and test data, but everything gets converted into CVUs, so we are free to use the platform in its entirety without getting bogged down by a license for certain testing areas. We know for sure how much we are going to spend."

"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."

"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."

"It is an averagely priced product."

"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."

"I rate the product's price two on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive. The solution is not expensive."

More BlazeMeter pricing and cost advice

"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."

"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."

"It is cheaper than other solutions."

"The solution requires an annual license."

"I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."

"NeoLoad is cheaper compared to other solutions. There are no additional licensing fees."

"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."

"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."

More Tricentis NeoLoad pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

it_user104961

Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees

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…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Computer Software Company

17%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Educational Organization

49%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?

Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and performance testing, enabling users to monitor and test public and private APIs. We ...

See all answers

What do you like most about BlazeMeter?

It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BlazeMeter?

BlazeMeter's pricing is competitive but can be negotiable.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Neotys NeoLoad?

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, scenario...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Neotys NeoLoad?

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 tho...

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs BlazeMeter

Compared 68% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs BlazeMeter

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs BlazeMeter

Compared 3% of the time

BrowserStack vs BlazeMeter

Compared 2% of the time

Tricentis Flood vs BlazeMeter

Compared 2% of the time

More BlazeMeter Competitors

Apache JMeter vs Tricentis NeoLoad

Compared 29% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Tricentis NeoLoad

Compared 23% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis NeoLoad

Compared 10% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs Tricentis NeoLoad

Compared 9% of the time

k6 Open Source vs Tricentis NeoLoad

Compared 6% of the time

More Tricentis NeoLoad Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter

November 2024

Download BlazeMeter product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis NeoLoad

October 2024

Download Tricentis NeoLoad product report

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud

NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad

Learn More

Perforce

Tricentis

Overview

BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery.

The rapidly growing BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.

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

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub

Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad

November 2024

Free Report: BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad

Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BlazeMeter 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.