Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs PractiTest comparison

Broadcom and PractiTest are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Broadcom is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.0, while PractiTest is ranked #19. Broadcom holds a 3.2% mindshare in TMT, compared to PractiTest’s 3.0% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of PractiTest users who would recommend it.

Broadcom Agile Requirements...

Read 21 Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer reviews

696 Views
362 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

PractiTest

Read 7 PractiTest reviews

484 Views
257 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Broadcom Agile Requirements...

PractiTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

PractiTest and Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are both robust tools used for test management and requirements design, respectively. PractiTest seems to have the upper hand in pricing and customer support, whereas Broadcom stands out in advanced feature capabilities justifying its higher cost.

Features: PractiTest is noted for its intuitive navigation, seamless integration capabilities, and user-friendliness. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is praised for handling complex requirements, its ability to provide comprehensive design features, and its powerful feature set for detailed requirements management.

Room for Improvement: PractiTest could benefit from enhancements in reporting functionalities, customization options, and potentially more advanced features. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer requires improvements in interface design, performance optimization, and user experience overall.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: PractiTest is generally appreciated for its straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer, although more complex to deploy, benefits from comprehensive support resources.

Pricing and ROI: PractiTest offers competitive pricing and is seen as providing good ROI due to its cost-effectiveness combined with strong customer support. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer has higher setup costs, but users believe the advanced features and capabilities justify the investment, contributing to perceived higher ROI despite the price.

To learn more, read our detailed Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. PractiTest Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. PractiTest

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,566 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 Test Management Tools

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Requirements Management (7th), Test Design Automation (3rd)

PractiTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

19th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (22nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 3.2%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PractiTest is 3.0%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer	3.2%
PractiTest	3.0%
Other	93.8%

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer at Vodafone

Integration capabilities enhance testing and workflow automation

I rate Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer as 8 out of 10. It will be very nice if Broadcom has questions or comments related to my review and can reach me via email to clarify something. I want to be a reference for Broadcom. I don't have any information regarding the visual modeling function specifically. I'm not dealing with modeling requirements or generating optimized test cases in Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer. Broadcom takes a lot of information from us as end-users, and they provide fixes within two to five days maximum. My team has raised many enhancement requests and discussed them with Broadcom, and they are adding some of these features to the product itself. I look forward to receiving an email regarding these reviews, and I can add anything later if I forgot something, earning some points for this contribution on the website.

Read full review

Dave Carter

Test Team Lead at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees

Flexible and intuitive with easy reporting, and good support that is instantly available through chat

It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time. This is not an issue if you only have one bug tracker but we can potentially use different tools for different projects. As an example, if you connect PractiTest to Jira for one project, that's the one you have to use for all projects. We had a requirement to connect with Jira for one project, and a different tool for another, project but it was unable to accommodate that unfortunately. I would therefore like to see it easier to integrate with bug tracking tools at project level which would give each project the opportunity to use a different bug tracker if required.

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

"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."

"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."

"The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."

"Defects can be traced in the solution."

"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."

"The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage."

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

"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."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer pros

"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."

Cons

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

"It is not scalable anymore. It's not scalable because it doesn't support Kubernetes for making scalability, so I'm just going to increase memory and storage on the same machine."

"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."

"The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."

"The solution could improve security and authentication."

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

"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."

"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."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer cons

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

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

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

"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."

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

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."

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

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

22%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Retailer

11%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Large Enterprise	21

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	1

Questions from the Community

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

It's not affordable; it's very expensive. It would be suitable only for large customers, and a large customer will think twice before making a deal with Broadcom.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

Integration with AI is an area that needs to be improved quickly. To be clear, this relates to how to use AI to improve use cases, break down applications, and review designs, as this area needs to...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

This solution saves a lot of time in the software testing cycle because, with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer specifically, I am doing a flowchart, and I can extract test cases and use cases t...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Blueprint Storyteller vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 29% of the time

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 21% of the time

IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 19% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 16% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 14% of the time

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Competitors

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs PractiTest

Compared 19% of the time

Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs PractiTest

Compared 15% of the time

Jira vs PractiTest

Compared 15% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs PractiTest

Compared 14% of the time

TestRail vs PractiTest

Compared 12% of the time

More PractiTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

October 2025

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer report

Download Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

September 2025

Download PractiTest 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

Manage your QA and Testing process, controlling your testing tasks while getting complete visibility into your results, and most importantly releasing your products in a professional way

Professional end to end QA management for your manual and automation testing.

Create your manual tests and organize them based on cycles, sprints, etc.
Seamlessly integrate your manual testing with your automation and CI processes.
Reuse tests and correlate results across different releases and products.
Release your products with confidence and control.

PractiTest

Sample Customers

Williams, Rabobank

Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman

Buyer's Guide

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. PractiTest

September 2025

Free Report: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. PractiTest

Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. PractiTest and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. PractiTest 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.