Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Adaptavist and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Adaptavist is ranked #20, while OpenText is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.2. Adaptavist holds a 1.9% mindshare in TMT, compared to OpenText’s 9.8% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of Adaptavist users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Adaptavist Test Management ...

Read 5 Adaptavist Test Management for Jira reviews

1,005 Views
874 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

19,982 Views
6,794 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Adaptavist Test Management ...

OpenText Application Qualit...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

OpenText Application Quality Management and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira compete in the test management tools category. Adaptavist is often perceived as superior due to its comprehensive features and value for cost.

Features: OpenText Application Quality Management includes defect management, integration with IT operations, and robust traceability features. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira offers seamless Jira integration, flexible API capabilities, and an intuitive approach for Jira users.

Room for Improvement: OpenText could improve its integration with modern tools and reduce complexity in setup and configuration. It may also benefit from a more user-friendly interface. Adaptavist could enhance its feature set for complex multi-team environments and broaden its integration capabilities beyond Jira. Additionally, providing more extensive real-time analytics could be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText requires significant setup time due to its complex features, but it offers strong support resources. Adaptavist benefits from a smoother deployment because of its Jira integration and has efficient troubleshooting through comprehensive documentation and Jira channels.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText has a higher initial setup cost, but offers comprehensive solutions for enterprises. Adaptavist is more accessible in terms of pricing and offers quick ROI, particularly benefiting teams already using Jira, creating higher long-term value for Jira-centric organizations.

To learn more, read our detailed Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 915,287 peers since 2012

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

Adaptavist Test Management ...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

20th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Application Qualit...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 1.9%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.8%, down from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management	9.8%
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira	1.9%
Other	88.3%

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Ramakanta Sahu

Director of Product at Indian Institute of Management Bangalore

Has dashboard and reporting features that help us identify and address red flags

I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable. One challenge with integrating Adaptavist Test Management for Jira into workflows is ensuring it accurately tags and incorporates all relevant stories and epics. Sometimes, it’s unclear if the tool considers all dependencies and backlog items, which can affect how risks are assessed. However, it sometimes seems to miss this high-level perspective, which can be a limitation based on how the product is designed. This has been a concern for those who use it regularly, although I don’t manage these aspects personally.

Read full review

Greg Stone

Partner at IS Nordic AS

Manages multiple releases seamlessly

We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The program is very stable, and that is why we have so much success with it."

"It is a scalable solution."

"The program is very stable and scalable."

"Our software development process primarily uses Adaptive Test Management for Jira to monitor real-time risks across all stories and sprint planning. Additionally, we use it to create action plans for high-priority risks."

"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."

"My impression of the stability is very positive."

"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."

"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."

"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"

"The most valuable features are ALM's flexibility and performance."

"The report feature has helped me to generate a quality index report which is a critical report for management decisions."

"ALM will help your business; it will save time, make it easy to validate everything in the latest build, and make it easy for the managers to analyze the results and the progress of the test cases."

"Customer service is good, as they respond on time to inquiries and requests, and the technical guys at HPE are knowledgeable on the solutions provided."

"It is an application lifecycle management product for IT projects, powerful to manage the requirement traceability, coverage, test case design, mapping, test execution, defect tracking, and reporting."

"Customization is the most valuable feature."

"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

Cons

"Something that needs to improve is the model of the licensing. For instance, if you have two packs from two servers, you need to buy two licenses."

"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."

"I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable."

"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."

"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."

"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr it takes about 5-10 minutes."

"The desktop deployment causes issues when the enterprise has locked down PC."

"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet."

"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."

"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."

"We found some difficulty in working with it, as we're a large organization."

"It doesn't do Agile very well."

"In future releases I'd like to see better reporting, a more simplified UI, and improved metrics."

"We had problems with Solution Manager/SAP integration and use through customizing RFC calls."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."

"The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slightly higher than similar products, maybe five to ten percent more."

"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."

"It's a perpetual license."

"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."

"The pricing is expensive nowadays."

"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."

"Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."

"Compared to the market, the price is high."

"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

915,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

33%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Outsourcing Company

11%

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	41
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	161

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlen...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText DevPartner vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 12% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 10% of the time

PractiTest vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 9% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 9% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 6% of the time

More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Competitors

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 25% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 5% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 3% of the time

TFS vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

September 2026

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira report

Download Adaptavist Test Management for Jira product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

September 2026

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

Also Known As

No data available

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager

Overview

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira delivers comprehensive test management capabilities with features for step reuse, test case repositories, and risk tracking, enhancing project management through sophisticated metrics and flexible configurations.

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira integrates Microsoft services, offering a repository for test cases and supporting automation tools. Users benefit from risk metrics and flexible configurations for specific project requirements. Enhanced reporting and metrics empower project oversight, providing insights into sprint progress and overarching project goals. The integrated dashboard addresses workflow challenges, facilitating strategic planning. However, areas needing improvement include integration, customization, and intuitive reporting. Users mention the test creation process as time-consuming due to multiple tabs, and licensing could be further streamlined. The disparity between its query functionality and Jira can confuse users, indicating a need for more unified dashboard gadgets and AI-driven test failure analysis.

What are the key features of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?

Step reuse with Microsoft services streamlines repetitive tasks.
A test case repository simplifies test organization.
Automation tool integration enhances testing efficiency.
Risk metrics and count track project risks effectively.
Flexible add-on configurations meet specific project needs.
Comprehensive reporting and metrics offer high-level project views.
Dashboard features tackle challenges and improve workflow.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Streamlined test processes reduce redundancy.
Efficient testing through automation saves time and resources.
Enhanced risk tracking improves project predictability.
Flexible configurations align with team needs.
Data-driven insights support informed decision-making.
Improved strategic planning with proactive dashboard solutions.

In the finance sector, organizations utilize Adaptavist Test Management for Jira primarily for test case writing and execution, often deployed on-premises. The tool aids in contract management and internal business workflows, facilitating department collaboration between teams like marketing and engineering. As an agile lifecycle management plugin, it extends its reach to departments migrating from other management tools, particularly in test management applications.

Adaptavist

OpenText Application Quality Management offers centralized data management, traceability, and integration capabilities. It aids in handling requirements, test planning, and defect tracking while supporting both manual and automated testing. Challenges exist in deployment and browser compatibility.

Known for its robust reporting and flexibility, OpenText Application Quality Management is tailored for large organizations requiring a comprehensive solution supporting lifecycle coverage and seamless tool integration. Users can consolidate testing processes, manage requirements, and centralize reporting across manual and automated testing. While some face issues with project tracking, outdated interfaces, and limited browser compatibility beyond Internet Explorer, it remains widely used for regression and performance testing. Integration with tools like JIRA and support for tools such as UFT and ALM PC underscore its utility.

What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Centralized Data Management: Consolidates and organizes testing data efficiently.
Traceability: Ensures traceability across all stages of the testing lifecycle.
Integration Capabilities: Connects seamlessly with automation and other essential tools.
Test Planning and Execution: Supports both manual and automated tests in a streamlined manner.
Advanced Reporting: Provides robust options to generate insightful test reports.
Customization: Offers tailored solutions to fit specific organizational needs.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Efficiency: Increases test management efficiency across projects.
Scalability: Adapts to the varying scope of large-scale projects.
Lifecycle Coverage: Comprehensive management from requirement to defect tracking.
User-Friendly Interface: Designed for ease of use despite needing updates.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances high initial costs with long-term savings through efficient testing management.

In industries such as finance and healthcare, OpenText Application Quality Management is implemented to ensure rigorous testing standards. It supports test case creation and execution, defect tracking, and requirements management. Integration with JIRA and performance testing tools make it suitable for organizations needing synchronized testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear, Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

Buyer's Guide

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

September 2026

Free Report: Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

915,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management report.

See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Management Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.