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

Selenium HQ 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

Selenium HQ
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (4th), Regression Testing Tools (4th)
Tricentis NeoLoad
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd), Load Testing Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Selenium HQ is designed for Functional Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 4.4%, down 5.9% compared to last year.
Tricentis NeoLoad, on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 15.7% mindshare, up 15.2% since last year.
Functional Testing Tools
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AdityaRanbhare - PeerSpot reviewer
Boosts browser testing efficiency with WebDriver and multi-browser compatibility
The most valuable features of Selenium HQ include WebDriver and the remote framework, which is compatible with Selenium and is mostly helpful for me. Selenium HQ's compatibility with multiple browsers impacts my testing efficiency significantly, as it allows me to run tests on various browsers and generate comparative analysis reports. Selenium automates browsers easily with its web driver, and Selenium IDE facilitates end-to-end testing with its command and control flows.
Sangeetha Alur - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good user interface, customization and I like how it way it correlates, monitors, and integrates with the user interface
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. But earlier, the support was actually very wonderful. I started using NeoLoad right from 2011. So, there is room for improvement in customer service and support. It requires a lot of justification and a lot of emails that you need to send back and forth. But earlier, when I was working with Siemens, the integration of the NeoLoad team and Siemens team was very good, and the support was excellent. As soon as you raised a ticket, we had very good support, but that changed after Tricentis.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is compatible with and supports multiple languages, such as Java and Python. It is open source, and it is widely used."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
"For me, the most valuable feature of Selenium lies in its ability to help us find elements quickly. Apart from that, the driver interface is really useful, too. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application."
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"All the features in Selenium to automate the UI."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"With the tool, it is possible to compare NeoLoad test results against baseline and benchmark, and we can make the comparisons in the same window."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
 

Cons

"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"One key area for improvement is the documentation."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"I would like to see automatic logs generated."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"The solution could be improved regarding communication with browsers, as it is slower and a bit tricky compared to other frameworks. However, with the latest changes involving BiDirectional communication, it is becoming a top choice in automation frameworks."
"There is a challenge with concurrent testing, where parallelization is not fully supported."
"Selenium could offer better ways to record and create scripts. IDE is available, however, it can be improved."
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"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."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"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."
"If one person opens any script, another person won't be able to work on it simultaneously. If they can improve that feature, it would be helpful for everyone. I found that incorporating all the scripts into a single project was the challenging part. This is because we are working on different domains—I'm on one domain, and others are on another. We need to handle all these scripts cautiously."
"The product is expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"I have been using the open-source version."
"The setup cost is open source or free."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"The pricing is open source."
"It is an open-source product, it is free for anyone to use."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"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."
"Licensing for NeoLoad is subscription-based."
"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The tool is not cheap."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
"I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of pricing"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
830,726 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
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
51%
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

How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
Selenium is easy to install and mostly free, so there's no need for a license. This lack of costs makes it an attractive option.
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

SeleniumHQ
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, BrowserStack and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: December 2024.
830,726 professionals have used our research since 2012.