Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

Adaptavist and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Adaptavist is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.0, while OpenText is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1. Adaptavist holds a 2.7% mindshare in TMT, compared to OpenText’s 12.5% 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

390 Views
296 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

5,145 Views
1,389 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Adaptavist Test Management ...

OpenText Application Qualit...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 20, 2025

OpenText Application Quality Management and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira are competing products in application quality and test management. Data indicates that Adaptavist Test Management for Jira has superior features, which provides it with an advantage over OpenText, despite any pricing and support benefits OpenText might have.

Features: OpenText Application Quality Management offers a comprehensive solution with strong test management, tracking, and reporting capabilities along with robust integration with development tools. Conversely, Adaptavist Test Management for Jira delivers a highly customizable and seamlessly Jira-integrated solution, facilitating easy test case management and automation. The superior integration and flexibility of Adaptavist give it an edge over OpenText in terms of features.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Application Quality Management could benefit from a more intuitive interface and streamlined deployment process. Additionally, enhanced customization options and improved integration with a wider range of tools would be advantageous. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira could improve its documentation and tutorial offerings to assist new users. It may also benefit from expanding integration capabilities beyond Jira to other widely used platforms and addressing minor bugs reported in user feedback.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Adaptavist Test Management for Jira showcases smoother and quicker integration into Jira environments, with an intuitive interface that supports rapid deployment. OpenText's deployment process can be complex, requiring extensive configuration which could delay the setup. While OpenText offers strong customer support, Adaptavist's efficient deployment aids in faster adaptation and readiness for operations.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Application Quality Management generally involves a higher initial setup cost, potentially affecting ROI negatively. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira, however, typically provides a more cost-effective solution with quicker ROI due to its seamless integration with Jira and fewer deployment complications. This results in a lower total cost of ownership for Adaptavist, making it a more appealing option for budget-conscious tech buyers focused on maximizing returns.

To learn more, read our detailed Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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

10th

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

6.6

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 2.7%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 12.5%, up from 12.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

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

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer at Vodafone

Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities

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 bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

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

"It is a scalable solution."

"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."

"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 program is very stable and scalable."

"The solution's most valuable features are its bidirectional traceability, the solid structure within the test plan, and the test lab."

"The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable."

"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."

"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."

"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a very good test management tool especially for writing test cases and uploading. You can even upload the test cycles from Excel. You get the defects and the reports, and also some automation using EFT which works with ALM."

"You can plan ahead with all the requirements and the test lab set it up as a library, then go do multiple testing times, recording the default that's in the system."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is the alignment of the test to the execution and the linking of the defects to the two. It automatically links any issues you have to the test."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

Cons

"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."

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

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

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

"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."

"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."

"The UI is very dated. Most applications these days have a light UI that can be accessed by pretty much any browser; QC still uses a UI which has a look almost the same for the past 20 years."

"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."

"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."

"One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve its marketing. For example, Tricentis is much better at letting the market know about new solutions and updates. The migration of the tool could improve, but it can be difficult."

"I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."

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

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

"It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."

"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."

"I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."

"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."

"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."

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

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

33%

Computer Software Company

30%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?

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 slig...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.

See all answers

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?

See all answers

Comparisons

Zephyr Enterprise vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 42% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 31% of the time

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 27% of the time

More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Competitors

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 18% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 16% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

July 2025

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira report

Download Adaptavist Test Management for Jira product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

August 2025

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 is the full, featured, enterprise ready test management solution directly in Jira. It offers full traceability across issues, requirements, test cases, and execution. The tool allows for flexibility and customisation for test plans and runs. It offers a free and flexible REST API, includes the ability to automate bulk tests, and enables seamless integration with most continuous integration tools. The in-depth reporting capability gives users the ability to analyse and share test data results between development and business teams. It’s the single source of truth to track, manage and optimise your whole test lifecycle right inside Jira software.

Try it now https://marketplace.atlassian....

See the overview video

Benefits:

Drive reusability across Jira with cross-project hierarchical repositories for all test assets
Improve collaboration with flexible workflows between traditional and Agile development teams
Enhance coverage with end-to-end traceability across all test artifacts
Eliminate duplication to increase efficiency with versioning, test data parameters and shared step features
Improve visibility and functionality with 70 cross-project reports and gadgets
Reduce management time and effort, with rich APIs for integration with test automation and DevOps tools
Allows teams to seamlessly collaborate and manage multiple versions of test cases in parallel while providing an audit history of changes

Features:

Easy drag and drop organisation, planning and execution
Hierarchical folders to manage and reuse assets across Jira projects, releases and sprints
Test case libraries including versioning, shared steps and test data parameters
Test plans and runs to manage and track test execution cycles
Full traceability of test cases, requirements, test execution results and defects
70 cross-project reports, gadgets and Confluence Macros to track the coverage of your tests with advanced cross project reporting
Global and project level settings for customisation and standardisation
Custom fields for test cases, test steps, test plans and test runs
Migration function to import test cases from files or legacy test management tools
REST APIs for integration with test automation and DevOp tools

Use Cases:

Integrate CI tools such as Jenkins, Bamboo, Travis CI or other development applications like Github, Bitbucket, Datadog via the REST API for end-to-end integration across test case management, execution, and reporting
Automate testing at scale, whilst maintaining traceability inside Jira. Scaled to 10,000+ tests across multiple configurations, publishing results in Jira in under 30 minutes
Increase efficiency by significantly reducing time spent on test case specification and management
Benefit from reusability across Jira projects and single points of maintenance when reusing and organizing test cases
Improved visibility of software testing process and quality with 70 out-of-the-box reports, including real-time dashboards
Clear end-to-end traceability of requirements, tests, and defects ensuring that the delivered software meets requirements.

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

July 2025

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: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 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.