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. In its next release, I'd like to see more compatibility with new protocols or applications from Tricentis NeoLoad.
Many applications these days have dashboards, video images, and the like. The rendering of heavy-weighted applications can't be scripted via NeoLoad, so we have to use LoadRunner as an extra client. I think that component could be added to NeoLoad where the UI has more object rendering. For now, we cannot test that in NeoLoad and so people tend to go for the two client protocol of LoadRunner. For now, the GUA still sits on Windows so we do the scripting on our local machine and then transfer them to the cloud. It would be great if we could do everything on the cloud with NeoLoad.
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. What we want to see in this solution is how it integrates with the entire suite of Tricentis Solutions. Tricentis has a very successful product in Tricentis Tosca, and that is a product that is more focused on test automation. They have test management solutions. They have different management. Performance management or performance engineering within one solution would be a big winner for Tricentis NeoLoad, so this is an area for improvement for this solution. Otherwise, it is a really good tool. I still need to take a closer look at the integration of Tricentis NeoLoad. I want to see how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now. This is a recent acquisition, so we want to see how these results come together: test automation, performance testing, etc., so that's what I'm looking for.
The SAP area could be improved. Not the GUI applications, SAP log-on, or something like that. We can see features and use NeoLoad properly in all the normal SAP log-on areas. I haven't tried it, but I have heard that Citrix-based applications don't work properly in the SAP application. In those types of different areas, there could be more protocol flexibility. If there is a high number of users on NeoLoad—like around 5,000 or 6,000—it sometimes feels like that might be a bottleneck for the performance. That could be improved. With more users, there shouldn't be any issues from the tool side. With scripting in a different browser, sometimes there are compatibility issues and it doesn't generate the script properly. Those types of crashes could be removed.
There are still some glitches that they need to improve. We have given support feedback as well when we have some issues. They're very responsive and they do work to fix and improve issues. LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all.
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. One issue that we faced was that multiple users weren't able to work on the same application. We used to create multiple scripts based on the application and based on the projects, and then we used to integrate all of them in a single place. With NeoLoad, if you have to do this activity, to import a script, one user has to log off, and the second user has to copy the script and improve it, which is a time-consuming activity. These are the things that can block any further activity.
Automation Test Engineer and Team Lead at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2021-01-04T09:02:05Z
Jan 4, 2021
Our issues with the solution were related to the license and the support. We had a technical issue related to our software and they weren't able to solve the problem.
Director, IT DevOps & Quality Engineering at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2020-06-18T05:18:35Z
Jun 18, 2020
The price of this solution could be reduced to make it more competitive. We would like to see more focus on support for other types of endpoints. Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols.
Release Test Manager at a tech company with 201-500 employees
Real User
2020-02-16T08:27:41Z
Feb 16, 2020
Overall, we're quite satisfied with the product. Sometimes it's complicated to maintain the test cases. It's much easier than in JMeter, however. I'm not sure if this depends so much on NeoLoad, or is more based on the environment that we are testing.
Tricentis NeoLoad is a performance testing tool that provides developers and testers with automatic test design, test maintenance, realistic simulation of user behavior, fast root cause analysis, and built-in integrations with the entire SDLC toolchain. With NeoLoad’s plugins, teams can reuse and share test assets and results from functional testing tools, analytics, metrics, and APM tools in order to catch performance issues early. With NeoLoad’s full tech stack support, users can test the...
I would like to see support for auto-correlations.
While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us.
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. In its next release, I'd like to see more compatibility with new protocols or applications from Tricentis NeoLoad.
Many applications these days have dashboards, video images, and the like. The rendering of heavy-weighted applications can't be scripted via NeoLoad, so we have to use LoadRunner as an extra client. I think that component could be added to NeoLoad where the UI has more object rendering. For now, we cannot test that in NeoLoad and so people tend to go for the two client protocol of LoadRunner. For now, the GUA still sits on Windows so we do the scripting on our local machine and then transfer them to the cloud. It would be great if we could do everything on the cloud with NeoLoad.
An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag.
Tricentis NeoLoad could improve the range of codeless scripting such as with terminal emulation apps.
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. What we want to see in this solution is how it integrates with the entire suite of Tricentis Solutions. Tricentis has a very successful product in Tricentis Tosca, and that is a product that is more focused on test automation. They have test management solutions. They have different management. Performance management or performance engineering within one solution would be a big winner for Tricentis NeoLoad, so this is an area for improvement for this solution. Otherwise, it is a really good tool. I still need to take a closer look at the integration of Tricentis NeoLoad. I want to see how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now. This is a recent acquisition, so we want to see how these results come together: test automation, performance testing, etc., so that's what I'm looking for.
We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times.
The SAP area could be improved. Not the GUI applications, SAP log-on, or something like that. We can see features and use NeoLoad properly in all the normal SAP log-on areas. I haven't tried it, but I have heard that Citrix-based applications don't work properly in the SAP application. In those types of different areas, there could be more protocol flexibility. If there is a high number of users on NeoLoad—like around 5,000 or 6,000—it sometimes feels like that might be a bottleneck for the performance. That could be improved. With more users, there shouldn't be any issues from the tool side. With scripting in a different browser, sometimes there are compatibility issues and it doesn't generate the script properly. Those types of crashes could be removed.
There are still some glitches that they need to improve. We have given support feedback as well when we have some issues. They're very responsive and they do work to fix and improve issues. LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all.
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. One issue that we faced was that multiple users weren't able to work on the same application. We used to create multiple scripts based on the application and based on the projects, and then we used to integrate all of them in a single place. With NeoLoad, if you have to do this activity, to import a script, one user has to log off, and the second user has to copy the script and improve it, which is a time-consuming activity. These are the things that can block any further activity.
Our issues with the solution were related to the license and the support. We had a technical issue related to our software and they weren't able to solve the problem.
The price of this solution could be reduced to make it more competitive. We would like to see more focus on support for other types of endpoints. Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols.
Overall, we're quite satisfied with the product. Sometimes it's complicated to maintain the test cases. It's much easier than in JMeter, however. I'm not sure if this depends so much on NeoLoad, or is more based on the environment that we are testing.
It needs improvement with post-production.
NeoLoad does not support Citrix-based applications. Neotys should take a look into this protocol.