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

RadView WebLOAD vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.5%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 13.0%, down from 13.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad13.0%
RadView WebLOAD3.5%
Other83.5%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1265766 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Team Lead at Medtronic, Inc.
IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated
You pay for the number of users that you're going to be utilizing. In order to scale up, you would have to pay for additional users, but for our use case, we're able to scale fairly easily. We have a license for 500, but we're using half of that for our initial workflow. For maintenance, as far as I'm aware, there's only one person really working on the maintenance of it and we only really have one user consistently using the software. He's a QA person. We don't have any plans to increase our usage. Even though we've had it for a while, we have a major push to start utilizing it more. I imagine we'll probably be using it and utilizing it across our QA team in the next year. We're in the process of determining whether we're going to keep it or not due to the fact that it is so expensive. That's why I've been researching alternatives for the RadView.
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

"The ability to conceptualize the experience for users is great, the price as the bang for your buck is good, the user interface is quite user friendly, and the graphics make it easy to follow and are easy to identify."
"Customer service is excellent; they're very responsive and willing to work extra hours, and in the first couple of hours that we were up and running, they taught us how to implement it and to figure out and negotiate AWS."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"We are able to create load test scripts quickly in a fast paced environment, which in turn helps us identify performance issues."
"I particularly like Neoload’s ease of use, built in monitoring and their extensive library of wireless devices and protocols."
"I like the solution’s performance and integration. Also, the tool’s help center is very responsive and helpful. They have always helped me within a short duration of time."
"If I have to create a script in LoadRunner, it usually takes around six hours, but if I do the same thing in Neotys, it usually takes around one and a half hours to complete everything."
"The stability is okay."
"The licensing model is very flexible which supports a broad range of budgets, from small projects to enterprise-level setups."
"The solution has provided us with options to improve our applications by allowing us to design scenarios, and export our scripts to the Git repository, CACD integration, Dynatrace, and AppDynamics integration."
"It's user-friendly, and everything is handy, with scripting load testing and everything in a single tool."
 

Cons

"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"I would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"Well there’s one issue when I have five or six scripts-- you have to set up different percentages and the number of connections and users, no matter how I tweak it seems that when I have one of the load scripts in the mix set, a percentage of less than 8-10%, there’s a probability that it won’t run at all."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"We did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"Connecting with the solution's technical support can be time-consuming. The turnaround time for a ticket raised is around 72 hours, which becomes an issue when working on a huge project in our company."
"The UI lacks sufficient object rendering."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"The ability to show transactions per second during the test run is missing; currently, we have to eyeball the TPS using the graph."
"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."
"The protocol support area could be improved."
"I also ran into installation issues with NeoLoad when the installation never completed."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It costs $8,600 yearly and we have the Cloud, which is an additional $800. Our perpetual license is $800 and then the Cloud functionality with our 500 users is the $8,600."
"We purchased a license for two years."
"Tricentis NeoLoad price is a benefit of using this tool, it is less expensive than some of the other solutions."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"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 solution requires an annual license."
"We used a 60-day trial with ten hours of work per month."
"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."
"The vendor offers flexible licensing options"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 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
Performing Arts
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
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

No data available
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about RadView WebLOAD vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.