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

SmartBear LoadNinja 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

SmartBear LoadNinja
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
10th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 1.4%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 16.1%, up from 14.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kapil Tarka - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support
It's a new tool when I compare it with LoadViewer and HP LoadRunner. It needs time to mature. For example, it needs to improve concurrency. When you run a test suite, your scripts will generate some test data. If we are running a banking application and then we are running a full end-to-end suite, there are many actions that need testing. There's a lot of data getting generated. There should be a variable that we can store for later in our later test cases. We need data management and dynamic data generation to be able to capture the data which is generated.
RangaReddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible
I really didn't work on the cloud-based [version]. NeoLoad still has a cloud [offering], and it has pretty good integration. I heard that it's possible to integrate with JMeter as a tool as well. Maybe I could suggest: I wanted to know more about the integration with DevOps for performance testing. The automatic integration process – how can we run the scripts automatically within a CI/CD pipeline? So maybe I wanted to know how to integrate with DevOps, actually. I'm not sure whether that option is there with the tool or not. In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"It's a low-code testing tool"
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"The solution is a UI-based tool, so it's easy to use because we don't have to do actual recording with it. This makes it easier to use, and, in terms of speed, it's a bit faster than other tools when it comes to 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."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"I like the scripting and parameterization features."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
 

Cons

"It needs time to mature."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"Tricentis NeoLoad could improve the terminal emulation mainframe. It is not able to use the low code or no code option. You have to code it yourself."
"The product is expensive."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"Tricentis NeoLoad's mobile platform acts as a stand-alone application but needs to be integrated with the main interface"
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
"The licensing cost is less compared to other licensing performance testing tools."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
"Tricentis NeoLoad price is a benefit of using this tool, it is less expensive than some of the other solutions."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is much cheaper compared to other tools like LoadRunner."
"The vendor offers flexible licensing options"
"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
842,388 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
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
52%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement.
What needs improvement with SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja presented issues around some use cases that we wanted to do. We were using the solution to simulate using a browser and to give some browser access to our use case for multiple ...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear LoadComplete?
For API, we were previously using JMeter, which is an open-source solution. Overall, I rate SmartBear LoadNinja a seven out of ten.
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?
The solution is for continuous performance validation. The important thing is that it's not just for one load test and then forgotten. I try to integrate the performance tests into our pipelines, w...
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

SmartBear LoadComplete
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Falafel Software
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear LoadNinja vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.