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

ReadyAPI 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

ReadyAPI
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (17th)
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of ReadyAPI is 3.0%, down from 3.1% 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

SandeepSingh9 - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper
One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration.
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 dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."
"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."
"It can create stress tests very fast, and some features help you do it fast."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"The Excel sheet feature is good."
"For anyone who does not have experience with automation, ReadyAPI provides a sense of comfort, especially for testers who find it hard to go directly into coding."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use."
"When you are working in sprints, you need to have continuous feedback. ReadyAPI definitely helps in automating very fast and rapidly. We have less coding, and we can more easily define our assertions. We don't use it for full-blown performance testing, but normally if you are doing your functional testing, it gives you the request and response time. Anybody who is doing functional testing can see what the request and response times are and raise a flag based upon their business affiliates, that is, whether it is meeting their affiliates. You can identify this during functional testing."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"NeoLoad offers better reporting than most competing tools. It is effortless to analyze and measure the reported data. It's also simple to generate a report that most people can read and management can understand. NeoLoad helps you figure out the main issues inside the application."
"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."
"Simple capturing of dynamic variables and simple scripting."
"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."
 

Cons

"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"There are lots of options within the solution, however they are not upfront or user-friendly."
"Sometimes, if I changed something in ReadyAPI, it would not quickly pick up the change. It used to give me the same error repeatedly, and when I closed the application completely and restarted it, it would pick up that change."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
"Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"They have performance testing also. However, it's not that great."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"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 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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution has been fine."
"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."
"This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing."
"We use fixed licenses, and the last time I checked, I want to say it's around $680 per seat per year."
"There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."
"We pay $3,000 annually for a floating license. actually. That allows another person from my company to use it as well. It's a cloud-based license."
"The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."
"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."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
"NeoLoad is expensive, but to my knowledge, it's better than LoadRunner."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 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%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
6%
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 ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
The pricing of ReadyAPI is reasonable, considering its functionality compared to other tools in the market. However, I recommend open-source solutions for small-scale industries due to lower costs.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
Based on my experience, ReadyAPI could improve by simplifying the process of scripting. The automation features require extensive Groovy scripting, which is cumbersome compared to JMeter's regular ...
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

Ready API
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about ReadyAPI vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.