No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

RadView WebLOAD vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 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

RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.4%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 12.5%, down from 15.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad12.5%
RadView WebLOAD3.4%
Other84.1%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1265766 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Team Lead at Medtronic, Inc.
IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated
You pay for the number of users that you're going to be utilizing. In order to scale up, you would have to pay for additional users, but for our use case, we're able to scale fairly easily. We have a license for 500, but we're using half of that for our initial workflow. For maintenance, as far as I'm aware, there's only one person really working on the maintenance of it and we only really have one user consistently using the software. He's a QA person. We don't have any plans to increase our usage. Even though we've had it for a while, we have a major push to start utilizing it more. I imagine we'll probably be using it and utilizing it across our QA team in the next year. We're in the process of determining whether we're going to keep it or not due to the fact that it is so expensive. That's why I've been researching alternatives for the RadView.
AnantJoshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director Intelligent Automation at Truglobal
Performance testing has delivered diverse global retail loads and generates clear diagnostic reports
I did not notice any weak points or downsides in Tricentis NeoLoad except for the cost. Everything else is good with the tool. When I consider that service customers have to pay the cost for the load generation, I find that the cost increases, especially when I want to generate a load for a global customer with different loads in different regions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Customer service is excellent; they're very responsive and willing to work extra hours, and in the first couple of hours that we were up and running, they taught us how to implement it and to figure out and negotiate AWS."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The ability to conceptualize the experience for users is great, the price as the bang for your buck is good, the user interface is quite user friendly, and the graphics make it easy to follow and are easy to identify."
"Technical support has been excellent, responsive, and helpful in trying to work through issues and questions."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
"I can recommend Tricentis NeoLoad as an alternative tool when the part of Microsoft, especially if one does not have the budget ready to go for the others."
"It’s a very powerful tool which meets all our load and performance testing requirements, along with very sophisticated monitoring tools and reports."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"NeoLoad is more user-friendly than HPE LoadRunner."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"Customer support is excellent, with a very quick turn around time for any question asked."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
 

Cons

"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
"It would be great, in addition to the load tool, it would be nice, if Radview offered a JavaScript based functional test tool as well."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"Well there’s one issue when I have five or six scripts-- you have to set up different percentages and the number of connections and users, no matter how I tweak it seems that when I have one of the load scripts in the mix set, a percentage of less than 8-10%, there’s a probability that it won’t run at all."
"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"We did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"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 is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
"Reporting needs to be better. I would like to see information such as Send Time, Receive Time, SSL, Waiting Time, and Blocking Time in my response times."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"The documentation for the new JMS protocol is in its initial stages and Neotys needs to update their online support documentation with more information about it."
"The rendering of heavyweighted applications can't be scripted via NeoLoad, so we have to use LoadRunner as an extra client."
"Some users may find NeoLoad too technical, while other users may prefer a scripting language instead of a UI with figures and forms they have to fill in."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We purchased a license for two years."
"It costs $8,600 yearly and we have the Cloud, which is an additional $800. Our perpetual license is $800 and then the Cloud functionality with our 500 users is the $8,600."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is much cheaper compared to other tools like LoadRunner."
"NeoLoad is expensive, but to my knowledge, it's better than LoadRunner."
"The licensing cost is less compared to other licensing performance testing tools."
"The solution requires an annual license."
"NeoLoad is cheaper compared to other solutions. There are no additional licensing fees."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"Tricentis NeoLoad price is a benefit of using this tool, it is less expensive than some of the other solutions."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
910,437 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
13%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise51
 

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?
Tricentis NeoLoad use cases were for retail, specifically a US based retail customer.
What needs improvement with Tricentis NeoLoad?
I did not notice any weak points or downsides in Tricentis NeoLoad except for the cost. Everything else is good with the tool. When I consider that service customers have to pay the cost for the lo...
 

Also Known As

No data available
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about RadView WebLOAD vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
910,437 professionals have used our research since 2012.