Top 10 Tricentis NeoLoad Alternatives

4.1 out of 5

66 reviews
95% willing to recommend

Top Tricentis NeoLoad Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Tricentis NeoLoad based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Apache JMeter, BlazeMeter, and OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional). The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. Tricentis NeoLoad surpasses its competitors by offering blazing-fast test creation, robust scalability, and seamless integration capabilities, ensuring efficient performance testing and superior user experience across diverse environments, accelerating development cycles, and enhancing team productivity.

Tricentis Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Tricentis, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.

Get the alternatives report

Apache JMeter

3.9 out of 5

Apache JMeter

3.9 out of 5

Apache JMeter is an open-source Java application that tests load and functional behavior and performance in applications. Created initially to test web applications, it has expanded its functionality to test other functions. For instance, you can test a server to see how efficiently it works and how many user requests can be handled simultaneously.

Download Apache JMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

Free

This is an open-source solution, and there are no fees.

View comparison

Pricing

Free

This is an open-source solution, and there are no fees.

BlazeMeter

4.1 out of 5

BlazeMeter

4.1 out of 5

BlazeMeter offers cloud-native capabilities, flexible integrations, and scriptless testing for seamless scaling. In comparison, Tricentis NeoLoad provides advanced scripting, protocol support, and mobile testing features. BlazeMeter is ideal for flexible deployment, while NeoLoad excels in protocol variety and mobile performance.

Download BlazeMeter vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

BlazeMeter offers a straightforward setup cost model suitable for businesses requiring flexible testing solutions, while Tricentis NeoLoad requires a higher initial investment tailored for enterprises seeking comprehensive performance testing tools.

View comparison

Pricing

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

4.2 out of 5

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

4.2 out of 5

LoadRunner Professional offers extensive protocol support, appealing to tech buyers needing robust scripting and analysis. In comparison, NeoLoad's ease of use and CI/CD integration attracts those valuing adaptability, with more cost-effective options suitable for diverse deployment needs.

Download OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) has a significant setup cost, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad presents a more economical setup option, highlighting a clear cost differential between the two performance testing solutions.

View comparison

Pricing

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

4.1 out of 5

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

4.1 out of 5

Tricentis NeoLoad is favored for ease of use, quick scripting, and cost-effectiveness, appealing to those needing mobile testing flexibility. In comparison, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers comprehensive protocol support and features, making it ideal for complex testing environments with scalability needs despite its higher pricing.

Download OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

Tricentis NeoLoad offers an economical setup cost, while OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) tends to have a higher initial investment.

View comparison

Pricing

Tricentis NeoLoad offers an economical setup cost, while OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) tends to have a higher initial investment.

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)

4.2 out of 5

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)

4.2 out of 5

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise delivers extensive enterprise-level capabilities. In comparison, Tricentis NeoLoad offers cutting-edge features and ease of use. Choose LoadRunner for deep analysis and comprehensive testing, while NeoLoad suits those seeking user-friendly setup and flexible cloud-based functionalities.

Download OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise has a straightforward setup cost, while Tricentis NeoLoad offers more flexible pricing options. The cost differences highlight contrasting approaches to budget management and resource allocation between the two solutions.

View comparison

Pricing

ReadyAPI

3.9 out of 5

ReadyAPI

3.9 out of 5

Tricentis NeoLoad offers versatile load testing with easy scripting, cloud integration, and extensive protocol support. In comparison, ReadyAPI prioritizes robust API testing with drag-and-drop features and Git integration. NeoLoad focuses on performance, while ReadyAPI excels in flexible API testing and automation.

Download ReadyAPI vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

Tricentis NeoLoad involves a significant setup cost, while ReadyAPI is more economical to implement. The price contrast highlights distinct investment philosophies, with NeoLoad demanding a larger budget allocation compared to ReadyAPI's more budget-friendly approach.

View comparison

Pricing

Oracle Application Testing Suite

3.9 out of 5

Oracle Application Testing Suite

3.9 out of 5

Oracle Application Testing Suite offers strong Oracle application integration and comprehensive end-to-end testing for Oracle environments. In comparison, Tricentis NeoLoad provides broad cloud and on-premises deployment support, appealing to diverse IT setups with quick script creation and real-time monitoring capabilities.

Download Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

Oracle Application Testing Suite has a straightforward setup cost that varies based on features, while Tricentis NeoLoad offers a more flexible pricing model tailored to user requirements. These differences highlight distinct pricing structures for each tool.

View comparison

Pricing

k6 Open Source

3.8 out of 5

k6 Open Source

3.8 out of 5

Tricentis NeoLoad is favored for its advanced features like real-time performance testing and a robust analytics engine. In comparison, k6 Open Source stands out for simplicity, lower costs, and strong community support, appealing to budget-conscious teams seeking easy deployment and integration with developer tools.

Download Tricentis NeoLoad vs. k6 Open Source Report

Pricing

Tricentis NeoLoad requires a substantial setup cost, offering advanced features, while k6 Open Source has no setup cost, focusing on ease of use and flexibility. Each product aligns with different budget expectations and performance testing needs.

View comparison

Pricing

Eggplant Performance

3.9 out of 5

Eggplant Performance

3.9 out of 5

Tricentis NeoLoad excels in integration and rapid deployment, appealing to budget-conscious tech buyers. In comparison, Eggplant Performance offers powerful analytics and flexible, cloud-based solutions, suiting businesses valuing long-term benefits and advanced feature sets for expansive testing activities.

Download Eggplant Performance vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

Tricentis NeoLoad offers a flexible setup cost, catering to diverse project needs, while Eggplant Performance provides a straightforward pricing model, appealing to teams seeking simplicity.

View comparison

Pricing

Tricentis NeoLoad offers a flexible setup cost, catering to diverse project needs, while Eggplant Performance provides a straightforward pricing model, appealing to teams seeking simplicity.

RadView WebLOAD

4.1 out of 5

RadView WebLOAD

4.1 out of 5

RadView WebLOAD attracts teams with limited testing experience through its ease of use and scripting capabilities. In comparison, Tricentis NeoLoad offers advanced features like dynamic test adjustment and cloud integration, appealing to enterprises needing complex testing. RadView's competitive pricing draws budget-conscious organizations.

Download RadView WebLOAD vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

RadView WebLOAD offers a straightforward setup with moderate costs, while Tricentis NeoLoad provides a more complex installation with higher initial expenses.

View comparison

Pricing

RadView WebLOAD offers a straightforward setup with moderate costs, while Tricentis NeoLoad provides a more complex installation with higher initial expenses.

Show 5 more products

Related categories

Performance Testing Tools

Load Testing Tools

API Testing Tools