We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and OpenText ALM Octane based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful."
"The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"It is a stable solution."
"One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"Since implementing this solution we have better communication and information exchange with customers."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"With an Octane project, we have our automation, our requirements, our tests, our pipeline into build-and-deploy, and the ability to identify problem areas. It makes things quicker because it's more along the lines of an automated process."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Octane creates a gentle approach to Agile-based projects."
"It's more streamlined because we have it all under one umbrella. And once the business requirements and rules have been created, we can do test cases and apply them to the business rules."
"The feature I found most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its ability to integrate with the CI/CD stack."
"I like the fact that you can use it on top of Jira."
"The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions."
"An improvement on previous versions because it comes as preconfigured as possible."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved."
"During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"Certain areas in Codebeamer could be improved, like addressing small issues, glitches, or bugs."
"It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now."
"I like their smart analytics; perhaps they should continue to expand and improve there because it's a fantastic start."
"There's a trend in our requests to have the ability to export data, en masse, out of Octane. There are capabilities within Octane to export data, but there are specifics around test suites and requirements and relations, as well as certain attributes, that we would like to be able to export easily out of Octane and into a database or Excel."
"What could be improved in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its integration with Jira."
"Currently, Micro Focus ALM Octane is considered an old-world tool in the industry and lacks the perception of being a new-age tool among its customers."
"The limitation of Octane is that we can't do a release outside of the sprint. We can only plan the release in the sprint. With Agile and JIRA tools, we can plan the release outside the sprint and do a global release of all the projects from the sprint."
"The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality."
"Development of extensions or connections to GitHub actions could be better. Better integration with Azure DevOps would also help."
"The biggest problem with ALM Octane is that it's very complex, so it's difficult to use and scale."
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 38 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Codebeamer writes "Has good technical support services, but the migration process needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management. See our Codebeamer vs. OpenText ALM Octane report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.
