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

SmartBear LoadNinja vs Tricentis NeoLoad comparison

 

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

SmartBear LoadNinja
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
14th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis NeoLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 2.5%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis NeoLoad is 10.7%, down from 16.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad10.7%
SmartBear LoadNinja2.5%
Other86.8%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kapil Tarka - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support
It's a new tool when I compare it with LoadViewer and HP LoadRunner. It needs time to mature. For example, it needs to improve concurrency. When you run a test suite, your scripts will generate some test data. If we are running a banking application and then we are running a full end-to-end suite, there are many actions that need testing. There's a lot of data getting generated. There should be a variable that we can store for later in our later test cases. We need data management and dynamic data generation to be able to capture the data which is generated.
reviewer2732589 - PeerSpot reviewer
senior test engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Positive experience with seamless setup and responsive support but pricing and version compatibility need improvement
I'm not ready to share what areas of Tricentis NeoLoad have room for improvement now. The price could be more friendly, and it was impossible to continue using the same version of Tricentis NeoLoad, as we were forced to move to the next version. Sometimes there were compatibility problems, and that was a major problem with backward compatibility issues.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"The GUI based scripting is a huge time saver for us since we don’t have a dedicated performance team yet, as I can create scripts quickly and get tests going."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"Script designing and "free" network emulation are the most valuable features for us."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"The test cases are quite easy to build and to maintain. This is the most valuable aspect of the solution for us. It's the reason why they changed from JMeter to NeoLoad."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"Customer support is excellent, with a very quick turn around time for any question asked."
"The licensing model is very flexible which supports a broad range of budgets, from small projects to enterprise-level setups."
 

Cons

"It needs time to mature."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"The only issue that I had was with network virtualization on load generators installed on Windows Server 2008 R2."
"Analysis can be further improved. I have been using LoadRunner analysis and it has been a very powerful tool."
"However, they need to offer more protocol support."
"Since the ownership of NeoLoad has changed to Tricentis, they have done a very poor job with license management."
"Some of the documentation is geared more towards Java."
"They usually answer between 36 and 48 hours for non-critical issues, and with critical issues they hold your hand."
"It's straightforward to install and configure, but complex to convert scripts from a previous product to work in NeoLoad."
"Almost everything about NewLoad looks good, but I would like to have an indication of the variables for error messages appearing in the error tab."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
"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."
"It is cheaper than other solutions."
"The licensing cost is less compared to other licensing performance testing tools."
"When compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad has less costs. Compared to that, it's somehow affordable."
"The pricing is fair for high-volume licensing."
"NeoLoad now has a much more flexible licensing process."
"Pricing is always cheaper with Tricentis NeoLoad versus the very expensive Micro Focus LoadRunner."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 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
Manufacturing Company
14%
University
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise49
 

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?
My relationship with Tricentis NeoLoad is that I implemented it during a trial period, and then they implemented some solution on the basis of Tricentis NeoLoad. We tested both virtual infrastructu...
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

SmartBear LoadComplete
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Falafel Software
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear LoadNinja vs. Tricentis NeoLoad and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.