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

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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
5
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 August 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 2.0%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.6%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management9.6%
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira2.0%
Other88.4%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
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.
GS
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution."
"My impression of the stability is very positive."
"The program is very stable, and that is why we have so much success with it."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"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."
"What caused us to switch to this solution was the customizability."
"The wide range of supported current and legacy web technologies, desktop apps, and WebServices testing is by far the most valuable feature."
"HPE ALM is a relevant product that assists with test delivery, execution, and management within a project-driven environment."
"QC has been invaluable in the past for documenting our testing process, especially when needed for audits."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"It is designed to supplement the entire lifecycle and will definitely improve your productivity and traceability."
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"The user interface is fully web-capable; it's a website, and it runs on a browser."
 

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."
"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."
"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."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."
"As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern."
"The desktop deployment causes issues when the enterprise has locked down PC."
"More flexible reporting would be good."
"I frankly don't recommend Micro Focus solutions. The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."
"Customer Service: Fair. It takes at least 2 days for support people to respond to ticket."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support, and sometimes, we do not get responses from them."
"I'm looking at more towards something more from a DevOps perspective. For example, how to pull the DevOps ecosystem into the Micro Focus ALM."
"Scalability is becoming more complex."
 

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."
"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."
"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."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."
"This is an expensive solution."
"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
 

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.
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...
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.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

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)
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.