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

Tricentis Flood vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Tricentis Flood
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Tricentis Flood is 1.4%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 16.8%, up from 15.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Test Process Consultant - PeerSpot reviewer
Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options
The solution is not in an optimal state. During POC, we analyzed tool is kept on upgrading. The patch deployment is happening in parallel, things that are working today are not working tomorrow. We eventually sorted it out with help of CSM. We integrated this tool with other software such as Azure client, but many times without a valid or visible reason, the connectivity was breaking. Improvement suggestions- The dashboard creation for the reporting needs to be easier. Currently, the solution does not support multiple script executions and we would like to see support for this.
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

"Their technical support is awesome."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"The most effective aspect is especially when I'm renaming all the scripting factors, basically the containers that I use."
 

Cons

"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"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 debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications."
"Some users may find NeoLoad too technical, while other users may prefer a scripting language instead of a UI with figures and forms they have to fill in."
"Tricentis NeoLoad's mobile platform acts as a stand-alone application but needs to be integrated with the main interface"
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The only positive point is it came free with my test automation tool."
"This solution is in the average price range compared to other testing tools."
"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."
"Pricing for Tricentis NeoLoad could be cheaper because, at the moment, it's expensive. For a year, the solution cost us a lot of money, in particular, more than $50,000."
"Licence cost is very attractive compared to other vendor tools and also there are many license alternatives."
"The tool is not cheap."
"I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"The solution requires an annual license."
"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 Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,562 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
23%
Real Estate/Law Firm
10%
Government
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Educational Organization
49%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Tricentis Flood?
Tricentis Flood is the kind of versatile load and performance testing solution that my organization and I cannot help but recommend. It is recognized by companies across a wide variety of fields as...
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

Flood IO
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nike, heroku, Soulcycle, NEC, boston.com, Typeform, Xero, Telus
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis Flood vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,562 professionals have used our research since 2012.