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

ReadyAPI Performance 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

ReadyAPI Performance
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
10th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
8
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 ReadyAPI Performance is 2.6%, up from 2.0% 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%
ReadyAPI Performance2.6%
Other84.4%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mahendra Andhale - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies
Open-source and flexible but needs client-side scripting
It's an open-source tool and supports a lot of plugins and custom code, which allows integration with other tools like Azure and AWS. Also, the APIs tested with SoapUI can be directly used, avoiding the need to create collections like in Postman. The client-side scripting, if incorporated, would provide a complete solution for performance tests. It can handle user distribution and transaction throughput distribution effectively.
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

"It's an open-source tool and supports a lot of plugins and custom code, which allows integration with other tools like Azure and AWS."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"We can scale."
"It has helped improve productivity and functionality."
"It is a very good and handy product, there are so many features, and it is getting more popular day by day."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
"I can recommend Tricentis NeoLoad as an alternative tool when the part of Microsoft, especially if one does not have the budget ready to go for the others."
"It’s very easy for a person without any performance testing experience to use."
"It provides easy mobile performance testing solution for our customers."
"NeoLoad helped us to transition from load testing to continuous performance measurement."
"It's a low-code testing tool"
"It is a bit easier compared to our LoadRunner, and it is cheaper."
"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."
"NeoLoad is very user friendly and works well with HTTP and REST API’s, is very effective during cloud based testing, and the cost is a fraction of LoadRunner."
 

Cons

"It is very slow sometimes. If they could improve its performance, it would be really great for the users."
"It is very slow sometimes."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
"The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"They usually answer between 36 and 48 hours for non-critical issues, and with critical issues they hold your hand."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"The weakest feature of most of the load test tools is result analysis."
"The debugging part of Tricentis NeoLoad takes time."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"Tricentis NeoLoad crashes if an application contains more than 1,000 scripts."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"ReadyAPI Performance’s pricing is reasonable."
"This solution operates on a licence basis and the usage and cost varies according to the use case. It is more expensive if you include access to the learning center. On average it costs approximately 800 Euros."
"We find the cost to be affordable."
"The tool is not cheap."
"The licensing for this solution is renewable yearly, and covers all available features and technical support."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"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"
"I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of pricing"
"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."
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
Financial Services Firm
19%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Retailer
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
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
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI Performance?
Load UI is mostly free, and the pricing for the pro version is very affordable compared to other tools like LoadRunner.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI Performance?
The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool.
What is your primary use case for ReadyAPI Performance?
The primary use case is to conduct server-side performance tests, scalability tests, and endurance tests using SoapUI and Load UI.
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

LoadUI NG Pro
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Mercedes-Benz, Adobe, Hilton Hotels, The Home Depot
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about ReadyAPI Performance vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.