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

OpenText Silk Performer vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Silk Performer
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Performer is 0.9%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 18.1%, up from 15.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SR
Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy
In terms of areas of improvement, I would say the Silk Performance Explorer tool, which is used for monitoring and analysis, can be improved because that's where we spend most of our time when we're analyzing the test data. Any enhancements that can be provided in the monitoring sphere would be useful. When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test. The interface for the scripting could be more feature-rich. Integration with tools like Prometheus or Grafana where we can visualize the data would be great. As things stand, we have to use one monitoring tool to visualize data and another for visualizing the test metrics. Integration would enable us to see the metrics from Silk and correlate that with the metrics from other servers or other processes we're monitoring. It would save having to look at Silk data and server metrics separately. It's the way things are going with newer tools. I think the solution is being phased out by Micro Focus and their emphasis is focused more on LoadRunner. We haven't seen much development in the last few years.
RangaReddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible
I really didn't work on the cloud-based [version]. NeoLoad still has a cloud [offering], and it has pretty good integration. I heard that it's possible to integrate with JMeter as a tool as well. Maybe I could suggest: I wanted to know more about the integration with DevOps for performance testing. The automatic integration process – how can we run the scripts automatically within a CI/CD pipeline? So maybe I wanted to know how to integrate with DevOps, actually. I'm not sure whether that option is there with the tool or not. In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The stability is okay."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"Learning-wise, it's pretty straightforward and flexible because if the person has little knowledge of performance testing and the process, they can definitely easily grab the knowledge from NeoLoad."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
 

Cons

"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
"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."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
"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."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
"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."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of pricing"
"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."
"The tool is not cheap."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
842,690 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
29%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Insurance Company
4%
Educational Organization
53%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
The solution is for continuous performance validation. The important thing is that it's not just for one load test and then forgotten. I try to integrate the performance tests into our pipelines, w...
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 Silk Performer, Silk Performer
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Colorado, Medidata, Monash University
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Load Testing Tools. Updated: March 2025.
842,690 professionals have used our research since 2012.