No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Silk Performer vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

OpenText Silk Performer
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Performer is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 13.9%, down from 16.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad13.9%
OpenText Silk Performer1.5%
Other84.6%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SR
Principal Software Architect at OpenText
Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy
In terms of areas of improvement, I would say the Silk Performance Explorer tool, which is used for monitoring and analysis, can be improved because that's where we spend most of our time when we're analyzing the test data. Any enhancements that can be provided in the monitoring sphere would be useful. When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test. The interface for the scripting could be more feature-rich. Integration with tools like Prometheus or Grafana where we can visualize the data would be great. As things stand, we have to use one monitoring tool to visualize data and another for visualizing the test metrics. Integration would enable us to see the metrics from Silk and correlate that with the metrics from other servers or other processes we're monitoring. It would save having to look at Silk data and server metrics separately. It's the way things are going with newer tools. I think the solution is being phased out by Micro Focus and their emphasis is focused more on LoadRunner. We haven't seen much development in the last few years.
AnantJoshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director Intelligent Automation at Truglobal
Performance testing has delivered diverse global retail loads and generates clear diagnostic reports
I did not notice any weak points or downsides in Tricentis NeoLoad except for the cost. Everything else is good with the tool. When I consider that service customers have to pay the cost for the load generation, I find that the cost increases, especially when I want to generate a load for a global customer with different loads in different regions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We haven't used Silk on any project where it hasn't been able to support whatever we have needed."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"It helped in achieving the testing of on-premise applications, as well as cloud-based applications, without much difficulty."
"We are able to create load test scripts quickly in a fast paced environment, which in turn helps us identify performance issues."
"The scripting is really user-friendly and the reporting is very good."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"What I appreciate about Tricentis NeoLoad is that it excels at generating different kinds of loads."
"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."
"The most valuable feature that we've found useful is that NeoLoad provides a variety of bandwidths."
 

Cons

"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
"When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test."
"We had some initial issues with the number of tests, memory leaks, and the controller itself."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"The rendering of heavyweighted applications can't be scripted via NeoLoad, so we have to use LoadRunner as an extra client."
"Team Server - Neotys Team Server - This currently stores project data on the local drive. I suggest having Neotys Team Server Data stored on an actual server."
"It wasn't easy to learn how to use NeoLoad and it has a bit of a learning curve."
"Regular and strong support has to be made available by Tricentis during the solution's implementation and initial setup."
"Sometimes it's complicated to maintain the test cases."
"It needs improvements when handling binary values."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The vendor offers flexible licensing options"
"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."
"From a licensing cost perspective, I rate the product an eight out of ten since it is a cheap solution that looks costly for certain areas."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
"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."
"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."
"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 Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees
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
No data available
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 use cases were for retail, specifically a US based retail customer.
What needs improvement with Tricentis NeoLoad?
I did not notice any weak points or downsides in Tricentis NeoLoad except for the cost. Everything else is good with the tool. When I consider that service customers have to pay the cost for the lo...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Silk Performer, Silk Performer
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Colorado, Medidata, Monash University
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.