Digital.ai Agility vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

Digital.ai and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category. Digital.ai is ranked #16 with an average rating of 7.0, while OpenText is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2. Digital.ai holds a 2.4% mindshare in ALM, compared to OpenText’s 5.0% mindshare. Additionally, 75% of Digital.ai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Digital.ai Agility

Read 6 Digital.ai Agility reviews

1,378 Views
965 Comparison Views

75% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

6,509 Views
3,905 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Digital.ai Agility

OpenText Application Qualit...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

OpenText Application Quality Management and Digital.ai Agility compete in the project management and quality assurance sector. Digital.ai Agility has a higher perception of superiority among buyers for its features, while OpenText receives praise for cost-effectiveness and support.

Features: OpenText Application Quality Management offers comprehensive test management, streamlined test execution tracking, and robust test analytics. Digital.ai Agility provides seamless integration with agile methodologies, versatile project management tools, and rich feature sets including customizable dashboards.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Application Quality Management could enhance integration with third-party applications, expand automation capabilities, and refine its user interface for better intuitiveness. Digital.ai Agility might improve simplicity of use, offer more straightforward reporting, and reduce configuration complexity to better serve less tech-savvy users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText has a straightforward deployment model and strong customer support, facilitating smooth implementations. Digital.ai Agility involves a more complex deployment but offers extensive customization, adapting well to various business needs.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText is positioned as a cost-effective solution with quick setup appealing to budget-sensitive enterprises, while Digital.ai Agility requires a higher initial investment, justified by its long-term ROI through advanced features.

To learn more, read our detailed Digital.ai Agility vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Agility vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,032 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

Digital.ai Agility

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

16th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Release Automation (12th), Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (11th), Value Stream Management Software (5th)

OpenText Application Qualit...

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Agility is 2.4%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 5.0%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management	5.0%
Digital.ai Agility	2.4%
Other	92.6%

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Featured Reviews

PrashantM

Lead Consultant at Innovation Roots

Collaboration and setup efficiency stand out, though integration and local support need improvement

The solution is excellent for collaboration. From the agility point of view, they have very good sprint functionality, allowing you to set up sprints effectively. For Scrum teams, it is particularly good and easy to set up. With respect to sprints and getting metrics out, such as velocity and related measurements, the functionality is robust. The Scrum boards are particularly effective. Based on my colleague's exploration and setup, I observed how easily the team was able to use it. The integration with that tool was particularly helpful.

Read full review

reviewer1477047

Senior Test Analyst at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

Provides comprehensive automation capabilities but faces challenges with user interface

There are great features, however, transitioning between partners and managing a large number of test cases can be time-consuming. HPLM has one of the best UIs compared to other test management tools, allowing for efficient navigation between test pieces, test folders, test suites, and test execution. However, users are still moving to technical tools without a good UI because of potential pricing concerns. This pricing might be prompting them to move away from HPLM towards other solutions.

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

"It can generate reports showing a burndown chart, burnup chart, and the planned vs actual velocity."

"Agility is highly flexible. It can do much more than what our client is doing with it. They use it in a defined way. Some at that company have a much broader knowledge of agile and SAFe, but they're given applications and a mandated way to work. We had to work within their parameters and provide an accurate transition so the data would be mapped and pushed through."

"With some of the other tools, you have to buy 20 different plugins to get to the same capability that comes with the basic Agility capability."

"The solution is excellent for collaboration; from the agility point of view, they have very good sprint functionality, allowing you to set up sprints effectively."

"It allows my clients to have one central tool to manage their agile projects."

"For visualization capabilities, the automation capabilities make it possible to support the different personas. The features and capabilities are excellent and come with excellent support."

"It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."

"Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well."

"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."

"Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."

"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."

"It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations."

"The solution's most valuable features are its bidirectional traceability, the solid structure within the test plan, and the test lab."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

Cons

"The user interface can be improved by adding Save, Edit, Add, Cancel, and Return buttons to the popup windows that are displayed when you click on a child item."

"There is room for improvement in getting the analytics portion of the solution more integrated with the rest of it."

"It was not supporting some plugins. We wanted to migrate data that we were already using."

"In my work as a contractor, it's always frustrating when a client has multiple software applications that don't talk to each other and they all perform the same function. That presents a huge challenge between their IT groups."

"Improve how to create and track releases. Currently, I have to create child projects."

"The machine learning features are a new capability but could be improved. This is being worked by Digital.ai currently. Multicolor simulation, specifically, could be improved."

"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."

"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."

"There were multiple modules and stuff to the solution so maybe the requirements can map to test scripts. It can't map to test steps. If you've got a process that's set up and you've got multiple test scripts that are in it, each script has to be linked to the requirement and the whole set can't be. If we're doing process-driven testing, it's more difficult to do it at the script level, which is what we're finding from a traceability perspective."

"It is not a scalable solution."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should improve the reports. Reporting on tax execution progress against the plan. However, they might have improved over two years since I have used the solution."

"There is room for improvement in the scalability and stability of the solution."

"The performance could be faster."

"It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Comparing the pricing to other products, I think this solution is in the middle."

"You get what you pay for. Don't let your development teams dictate what the portfolio management team should use as the main tool."

"It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us."

"Compared to the market, the price is high."

"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."

"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."

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

"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."

"The licensing fee is a little expensive."

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

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

882,032 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

16%

Insurance Company

16%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Performing Arts

Marketing Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	39
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	162

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Agility?

It was not supporting some plugins. We wanted to migrate data that we were already using. The migration of data and getting it up and running from the legacy system took some time to get accustomed...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Agility?

We were explaining how to set up the project itself, which describes the main use cases for Digital.ai Agility. This includes how to set up the workflow and how to manage and build a Kanban. I want...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Digital.ai Agility?

Digital.ai Agility has a bigger reach because it has many good integration points. It can be a one-stop solution for different needs, eliminating the need to use multiple pieces of software. Howeve...

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?

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

Jira vs Digital.ai Agility

Compared 24% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs Digital.ai Agility

Compared 12% of the time

Jira Align vs Digital.ai Agility

Compared 12% of the time

Rally Software vs Digital.ai Agility

Compared 8% of the time

ServiceNow DevOps vs Digital.ai Agility

Compared 3% of the time

More Digital.ai Agility Competitors

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 17% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 7% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 6% of the time

Rally Software vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Agility

February 2026

Download Digital.ai Agility product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

January 2026

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

Also Known As

VersionOne Lifecycle, VersionOne, CollabNet VersionOne, Digital.ai Continuum

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager

Overview

Enterprise business agility rests on agile planning that scales and has the flexibility needed to meet the needs of customers and the market. Digital.ai Agility enables organizations to scale up agile from the team level across the product portfolio, improve collaboration and efficiency, and deliver software that provides more value.

Digital.ai

OpenText Application Quality Management offers centralized data management, traceability, and integration capabilities. It aids in handling requirements, test planning, and defect tracking while supporting both manual and automated testing. Challenges exist in deployment and browser compatibility.

Known for its robust reporting and flexibility, OpenText Application Quality Management is tailored for large organizations requiring a comprehensive solution supporting lifecycle coverage and seamless tool integration. Users can consolidate testing processes, manage requirements, and centralize reporting across manual and automated testing. While some face issues with project tracking, outdated interfaces, and limited browser compatibility beyond Internet Explorer, it remains widely used for regression and performance testing. Integration with tools like JIRA and support for tools such as UFT and ALM PC underscore its utility.

What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Centralized Data Management: Consolidates and organizes testing data efficiently.
Traceability: Ensures traceability across all stages of the testing lifecycle.
Integration Capabilities: Connects seamlessly with automation and other essential tools.
Test Planning and Execution: Supports both manual and automated tests in a streamlined manner.
Advanced Reporting: Provides robust options to generate insightful test reports.
Customization: Offers tailored solutions to fit specific organizational needs.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Efficiency: Increases test management efficiency across projects.
Scalability: Adapts to the varying scope of large-scale projects.
Lifecycle Coverage: Comprehensive management from requirement to defect tracking.
User-Friendly Interface: Designed for ease of use despite needing updates.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances high initial costs with long-term savings through efficient testing management.

In industries such as finance and healthcare, OpenText Application Quality Management is implemented to ensure rigorous testing standards. It supports test case creation and execution, defect tracking, and requirements management. Integration with JIRA and performance testing tools make it suitable for organizations needing synchronized testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Siemens Health Services (HS), Cerner Corporation, Aaron's, Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, Kelley Blue Book, AOL, Axway, Tideworks, bwin Interactive Entertainment, AG, Intergraph, Eos Group, PeopleCube, Liquid Machines

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

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Agility vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

February 2026

Free Report: Digital.ai Agility vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Agility vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,032 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Digital.ai Agility vs. OpenText Application Quality Management 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.