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

RadView WebLOAD vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
11th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
16th
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 November 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.5%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 14.1%, up from 11.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad14.1%
RadView WebLOAD3.5%
Other82.4%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Vadim Urintsov - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Tester / Quality Assurance Analyst at Bitnami
An excellent solution for graph testing on programming software
Our primary use case for the solution is for graph testing on programming software The information provided via the solution and the dashboard is valuable. Additionally, it's interesting as you can view inside information integrated and see the WebLOAD with APM. There is no analytical dashboard…
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

"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"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 tool itself is very viable for us."
"Technical support has been excellent, responsive, and helpful in trying to work through issues and questions."
"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 solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"The licensing model is very flexible which supports a broad range of budgets, from small projects to enterprise-level setups."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"A great deal of improvement in application performance happened because we could pin point the bottlenecks."
"Simple capturing of dynamic variables and simple scripting."
"Script designing and "free" network emulation are the most valuable features for us."
"Customer support is excellent, with a very quick turn around time for any question asked."
"I have worked on various different performance testing tools, and I found NeoLoad very much within budget without compromising the quality of the product."
 

Cons

"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"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."
"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."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"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."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"I would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"We purchased a two-year license but broke the contract after 18 months."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"Since the ownership of NeoLoad has changed to Tricentis, they have done a very poor job with license management. They changed the license policy very abruptly."
"It would be nice if this could be cheaper."
"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."
"There were some features that were lacking in Tricentis NeoLoad, e.g. those were more into Citrix and other complicated protocols, which were supported easily by a competitor: Micro Focus LoadRunner. We also need to look into how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now."
"It's straightforward to install and configure, but complex to convert scripts from a previous product to work in NeoLoad."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
 

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."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"NeoLoad is cheaper compared to other solutions. There are no additional licensing fees."
"We used a 60-day trial with ten hours of work per month."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"NeoLoad is expensive, but to my knowledge, it's better than LoadRunner."
"From a licensing cost perspective, I rate the product an eight out of ten since it is a cheap solution that looks costly for certain areas."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,939 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%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
 

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: October 2026.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.