ConformIQ Creator vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center comparison

Conformiq and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Conformiq is ranked #22, while OpenText is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.0. Conformiq holds a 1.3% mindshare in TMT, compared to OpenText’s 12.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Conformiq users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

ConformIQ Creator

Read 3 ConformIQ Creator reviews

217 Views
38 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Read 207 OpenText ALM / Quality Center reviews

2,162 Views
778 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

ConformIQ Creator

OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

OpenText ALM / Quality Center and ConformIQ Creator compete in Application Lifecycle Management. ConformIQ Creator appears to have the upper hand due to its superior features despite a higher price.

Features: OpenText ALM / Quality Center offers comprehensive test management capabilities, seamless integration with other tools, and extensive support. ConformIQ Creator provides automated model-based testing, ease of use, and advanced automation that reduces manual testing efforts.

Room for Improvement: OpenText ALM / Quality Center needs better flexibility and modern testing methodologies. ConformIQ Creator requires improvements in reporting capabilities and enhanced tool integrations.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText ALM / Quality Center can be challenging to deploy but is supported by robust customer service. ConformIQ Creator has a straightforward deployment process and responsive support team.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText ALM / Quality Center is cost-effective and provides satisfactory ROI. ConformIQ Creator, although more expensive, offers a higher ROI due to automation efficiencies.

To learn more, read our detailed ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 856,873 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

ConformIQ Creator

Ranking in Test Management Tools

22nd

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Design Automation (2nd), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (23rd)

OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Ranking in Test Management Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

207

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of ConformIQ Creator is 1.3%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText ALM / Quality Center is 12.6%, up from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer1518657

QE Manager at Capgemini

Feature-rich stable tool with multiple options to control output, good integration with other tools, and knowledgeable support team

The core functionality of the tool is automated test generation of optimized test suite; the tool has extensive list of options for the same. The product's integration with other tools sets it apart. It has integrations with many upstream (for requirements mapping) and downstream (export of test cases to various tools) products. It is like "plug-and-play". For any customized downstream tool, like our proprietary automation framework, support is provided for custom development. It is has features - Business AD - to use in Agile implementations. The latest version seems to have support for BDD/Gherkin as well, which we have not used much.

Read full review

Huong Vuong

Sap Fico Consultant at Avient Corporation

Effective testing and good data management with seamless Excel integration

There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements. For example, only the first user can click 'run' during testing, and subsequent users have to click 'continue manual run', which can create reporting errors. Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.

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

"The tool has the ability to integrate with various requirement management, test management, and version control tools."

"Though optimized and automated test generation is the core functionality, the product's integration with other tools sets it apart."

"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."

"I would rate the product a seven out of ten."

"The most beneficial feature of test management in this solution is its ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously."

"The solution's support team was always there to help."

"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."

"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."

"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"

"The product's initial setup phase is easy."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center pros

Cons

"I would like to see the output data optionally used as input for the model, as further action in the flow."

"Even though the 4.1 version is a far-improved version from its earlier avatars, the performance of test generation is still an issue on real-time models we have."

"It would be helpful to have a feature in the tool's UI to map object locators within the system."

"HPE ALM’s out-of-the-box reporting can be perceived as rigid and limited, to an extent."

"The reporting feature could be improved. It would be better if they simplified some things."

"Certain applications within this solution are not really compatible with certain applications like ERP. The problem is when we're trying to use these applications or devices, the solution itself doesn't scale."

"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."

"The solution's reporting could be improved."

"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."

"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."

"Is not very user-friendly."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."

"This is an expensive solution."

"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."

"The solution is priceed high."

"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."

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

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market."

"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center 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

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

42%

Computer Software Company

Energy/Utilities Company

Comms Service Provider

Educational Organization

63%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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?

We work with Jira now, and there are some very good workflows. There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval. I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the mar...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs ConformIQ Creator

Compared 39% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs ConformIQ Creator

Compared 38% of the time

More ConformIQ Creator Competitors

OpenText ALM Octane vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Compared 19% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Compared 19% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Compared 13% of the time

Jira vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Compared 13% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Test Management Tools

June 2025

Download ConformIQ Creator product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText ALM / Quality Center

May 2025

Download OpenText ALM / Quality Center product report

Also Known As

Conformiq Creator, Conformiq Transformer

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM

Overview

Conformiq Creator provides a solution for automating testing processes and speeding up the software development lifecycle of Enterprise IT applications. Conformiq Creator is used in various sectors, including Telecom, Banking, Finance, Insurance, Retail, and Public Sector services. Launched initially in 2013, Creator quickly gained popularity among its users for its functional testing, application testing, system testing, and end-to-end testing.

Conformiq Transformer shortens the path to test automation, simplifies model-based testing (MBT) adoption using existing methods, and automates manual test execution. Along with Conformiq Creator, which generates executable test cases, scripts and documentation from models, it automates and transforms test design, extending the Conformiq 360° Test Automation™ solution for complex system testing at the speed of development.

Conformiq

OpenText ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps you govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Alcatel-Lucent, Avaya, Daimler, Ericsson

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

Buyer's Guide

ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center

June 2025

Free Report: ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center

Find out what your peers are saying about ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center 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.