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
13th
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 June 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.4%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 11.6%, down from 16.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad11.6%
RadView WebLOAD3.4%
Other85.0%
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

"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
"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."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"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."
"Technical support has been excellent, responsive, and helpful in trying to work through issues and questions."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"Return on investment was better because our deliverables were not getting impacted and it was cheaper, so return on investment increased a lot compared to LoadRunner."
"To give perspective, we went from spending three million dollars to 160 thousand dollars, which is a huge saving and good value."
"A complex LoadRunner script could take days to create, but the same script in NeoLoad could be created within hours."
"Script designing and "free" network emulation are the most valuable features for us."
"I would rate it as eight out of 10 for ease of setting up."
"I would strongly recommend this tool highly."
 

Cons

"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"We did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"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."
"The weakest feature of most of the load test tools is result analysis."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"I did not notice any weak points or downsides in Tricentis NeoLoad except for the cost."
"The product is expensive."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"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."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We purchased a license for two years."
"The tool's pricing is somewhat higher than licensed tools like LoadRunner. The approximate cost is around $25,000. There are no additional charges for maintenance or support. Everything is included in the package we have."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The solution requires an annual license."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"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 tool is not cheap."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
902,417 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
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software 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?
My use case for the product is that if this is in the phone, it could start repairing using the product; it's an ERB application. It's a priority to use the two tools Tricentis NeoLoad ratio to the...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis NeoLoad?
The vendor offers flexible licensing options. Tricentis NeoLoad has a SaaS platform. The solution can probably be available between 30 and 50 thousand per year, while open-source tools cost way less.
 

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: June 2026.
902,417 professionals have used our research since 2012.