Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Polarion Requirements comparison

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Polarion Requirements

Download the complete report

Helped 849,963 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

Broadcom Agile Requirements...

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Management Tools (11th), Test Design Automation (1st)

Polarion Requirements

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

3rd

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion Requirements is 14.7%, down from 15.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

Gireesh Subramonian

Assistant Director at Ernst & Young

Helps the development team to finish tasks within the required timeframe

The team I am working with was never into Agile before. We have a daily scrum-call and before that, we have to define all the tasks that we are going to work on for a number of sprints. For example, there is a Product Increment Planning meeting where we put all the user requirements into the product backlog. Then we put them back to the respective sprints. A product increment consists of about five iterations, or five sprints. And we pull each of these backlog items to these particular sprints or iterations, so that it is easy for the development team to pick up, based on the priority. The backlog is set, and it is pulled into particular sprints, based on business priority. So it helps the development team to take up and finish tasks within the required timeframe. It helps in productivity, traceability, and saves time.

Read full review

Michael Sanchez

ALM Change & Deployment at MS Consulting

Useful for Application Lifecycle Management and has good collaboration features

In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps.

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

"In terms of meeting business challenges, it helped to shorten the dev/testing cycle by identifying requirements gaps early in the process, by having models shared within the development team. It helped increase test coverage and reduce the number of issues experienced by clients/customers."

"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."

"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."

"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."

"The ability to create models/diagrams at multiple levels (nest/embed them) helps in taking models from high-level business requirements and building them into detailed requirements models and test models. Plus, it helps reuse lower level models. It also allows maintaining models at appropriate levels, even for very complex systems/solutions."

"I like the way Broadcom ARD inserts test cases in execution mode. Also, ARD can be used apart from Broadcom TDM. It's an add-on through which you supply data through ARD test cases when there is a need for extra data."

"Helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model."

"Measuring test coverage helps in one of the most challenging tasks. It has logic that can help to select the right set of scenarios and know what coverage it will provide."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer pros

"In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps."

"The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now."

"We worked with the web interface."

"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."

"We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for automotive industries. There is an open API for integration with Jira as well, so for me, customization is a strong point."

"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."

"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."

"A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization."

More Polarion Requirements pros

Cons

"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."

"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."

"At present, there is no option for test data parameters from ARD for virtual databases. We have to create them in TDM and push them as well. Virtual database connectivity needs to be improved. They need to come up with some areas where they can create synthetic data parameters easily from the test cases that have been designed."

"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."

"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."

"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."

"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."

"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer cons

"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."

"If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable."

"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear."

"Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature."

"The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management."

"In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily understandable for end-users."

"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."

"It is stable enough but if you would like to work with more requirement objects, then you will get timeouts."

More Polarion Requirements cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."

"At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves. Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."

"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."

"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."

"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."

"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."

"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."

"Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."

"The product's price is high."

"It is expensive but not for what it is. It is just the right price for what it is. Its price is also similar to other solutions."

"The pricing model is flexible. You don't have to pay for the full functionalities. And it's a one-time investment for the licenses. You purchase what you need and then can work with that."

"I believe the cost is subjective. It seems a bit pricey, but it depends on your perspective. To provide some context, I compared the prices with GitLab and Jira. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Jira's prices. However, GitLab costs around 40 euros, and DeepLab, which I recently discovered, also falls in a similar price range. I'm not sure about DeepLab's features or interface improvements, as they might have been implementing requirements management over the past six months. In contrast, Polarion costs around 50 to 60 euros based on the 2021 prices I have. While it may seem a bit expensive, it's worth considering whether the additional investment, perhaps around 68 euros per user, is justified. It might appear costly at first glance, but it's essential to acknowledge that it can greatly streamline your work processes."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Energy/Utilities Company

25%

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

30%

Computer Software Company

11%

Healthcare Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs.

What needs improvement with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework.

What do you like most about Polarion Requirements?

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Polarion Requirements?

I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.

What needs improvement with Polarion Requirements?

In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily under...

Tricentis Tosca vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Comparisons

Compared 39% of the time

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 33% of the time

IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 28% of the time

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Competitors

IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 56% of the time

Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 21% of the time

IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 11% of the time

Jira vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 10% of the time

Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 2% of the time

More Polarion Requirements Competitors

Product Reports

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Download Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer product report

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer report

Polarion Requirements

Download Polarion Requirements product report

Also Known As

Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer

No data available

Overview

CA Agile Requirements Designer is an end-to-end requirements gathering, test automation and test case design tool which drastically reduces manual testing effort and enables organizations to deliver quality software to market earlier and at less cost. The optimal set of manual or automated tests can be derived automatically from requirements modeled as unambiguous flowcharts and are linked to the right data and expected results. These tests are updated automatically when the requirements change, allowing organizations to deliver quality software which reflects changing user needs.

Broadcom

Polarion REQUIREMENTS is designed from the ground for highly effective, transparent and secure collaboration, while teams have the option to work in their familiar environments.

Siemens

Sample Customers

Williams, Rabobank

NetSuite, Ottobock, Zumtobel Group, Kªster Automotive GmbH, Sirona Dental Systems, LifeWatch, U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), PHOENIX CONTACT Electronics GmbH, Metso Corporation

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Polarion Requirements