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

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 12, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
80
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
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 13.0%, down from 15.4% 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

HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
Test Process Consultant - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports SAP and non-SAP applications and helps identify performance issues before production deployment
Over the last eighteen months, our focus has primarily revolved around tool selection, procurement, Proof of Concepts (POCs), approval and implementation. Recently, we have successfully implemented the solution and are currently delving into its features. The key features of Neoload are: * Utilization of Tosca Functional automation test scripts for executing performance tests, resulting in significant time savings and ease of script reuse with minimal modifications. * A shallow learning curve - no prerequisite programming language or performance testing expertise is necessary to operate this tool. We provided training to our technical, functional, and testing teams for seamless utilization. * Reduced effort for script maintenance when compared to alternative performance testing tools.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"LoadRunner Professional allowed us to load test potential new payroll solutions that would be implemented throughout the entire organization so that we knew which was best suited to performing well under pressure."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them. It provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."
"It is an advanced tool with multiple options available for the performance system."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"Simple capturing of dynamic variables and simple scripting."
"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"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, scenarios, and model, which I find helpful. I also found the Result Manager a fascinating part of Tricentis NeoLoad because of the way it collates results and presents reports. The straightforward implementation of Tricentis NeoLoad, including ease of use, is also valuable to my team."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"My company has a good experience with Tricentis NeoLoad, and what I like best about it is that it lets you generate loads from different geographies. The load generation agents getting placed on different geographies is a very good feature of the solution. I also like that you can scale up Tricentis NeoLoad very quickly. The general feedback on performance testing with Tricentis NeoLoad for all product lines within my company is good."
 

Cons

"I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients."
"LoadRunner Professional's parameter data could be improved."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"We are going to continue to use the product in the future, I recommend this product. However, those who are looking for only REST-based on the API, I would recommend some other tool because of the cost. There are others available on the market."
"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"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."
"Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive."
"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."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad."
"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."
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
"The UI lacks sufficient object rendering."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
"For licensing, we pay a lot for it. But the incentive is the support we get with it, that we pay once, and we are set."
"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive."
"The licensing of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. If it can be easier and the concurrent run can be included with the current total number of users, it would be helpful."
"I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of pricing"
"The solution requires an annual license."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"Tricentis NeoLoad price is a benefit of using this tool, it is less expensive than some of the other solutions."
"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 thousand users."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
831,158 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
19%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Educational Organization
52%
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 do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive. The virtual table server feature should be reintroduced. Some AI capabilities should be added. There should be an '...
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

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.