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 15.9% mindshare in PTT, compared to Tricentis’s 15.7% 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

5,493 Views
3,200 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Tricentis NeoLoad

Read 64 Tricentis NeoLoad reviews

6,699 Views
3,411 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 823,795 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

BlazeMeter

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

4th

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (6th)

Tricentis NeoLoad

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 15.9%, up from 13.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 15.7%, up from 15.2% 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

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

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 on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."

"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."

"It is a stable solution. When we compare BlazeMeter with other tools in the market, I can say that the solution's overall performance has also been very good in our company."

"In our company, various teams use BlazeMeter, particularly appreciating its cloud license software, which supports up to 5,000 users. BlazeMeter's cloud capabilities allow us to load test or simulate traffic from any location worldwide, such as Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and even specific cities like Delhi. So, with one cloud license, we can simulate user load from various locations globally."

"With the help of the Mock Services, we are overcoming everything. Wherever we are facing issues, whether they will be long term or temporary, by implementing the Mock Services we can bypass the faulty components that are not needed for our particular testing."

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

"There is a repository of all the scripts that we have created. You can go back and compare tests to see what the tests looked like. If I want to go and compare something with whatever happened six months or one year back, I can do that."

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

More BlazeMeter pros

"The stability is okay."

"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."

"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."

"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."

"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."

"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."

"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."

"I like the scripting and parameterization features."

More Tricentis NeoLoad pros

Cons

"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."

"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."

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

"The tool fails to offer better parameterization to allow it to run the same script across different environments, making it a feature that needs a little improvement."

"The reporting capabilities could be improved."

"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."

"The Timeline Report panel has no customization options. One feature that I missed was not having a time filter, which I had in ELK. For example, there are only filter requests for a time of less than 5 seconds."

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

More BlazeMeter cons

"The SAP area could be improved."

"Tricentis NeoLoad's mobile platform acts as a stand-alone application but needs to be integrated with the main interface"

"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."

"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."

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

"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."

"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."

"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."

More Tricentis NeoLoad cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product pricing is reasonable."

"The solution is free and open source."

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

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

"It is an averagely priced product."

"The product isn't cheap, but it isn't the most expensive on the market. During our proof of concept, we discovered that you get what you pay for; we found a cheaper solution we tested to be full of bugs. Therefore, we are willing to pay the higher price tag for the quality BlazeMeter offers."

"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."

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

More BlazeMeter pricing and cost advice

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

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

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

"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."

"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate Tricentis NeoLoad's pricing a seven out of ten."

"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."

"I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of pricing"

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

823,795 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

50%

Financial Services Firm

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 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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs BlazeMeter

Compared 67% 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 7% of the time

More Tricentis NeoLoad Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter

December 2024

Download BlazeMeter product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis NeoLoad

November 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

823,795 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.