No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Digital.ai Agility vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Release Automation (13th), Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (8th), 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 August 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Agility is 2.7%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 7.5%, up from 5.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management7.5%
Digital.ai Agility2.7%
Other89.8%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

JaiBharath Boithi - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Scientist at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Agile planning has improved daily coordination but reporting and dashboards still need more flexibility
I would like to see more advanced reporting and analytics customization. The existing dashboards are useful for tracking velocity, backlog, and delivery, but deeper real-time insights would improve decision-making. I would also like simpler integrations and more flexibility, especially across large teams and complex projects. Another improvement I would like is more flexible reporting and dashboard customization, especially for creating organization-specific metrics. More intuitive visualizations would also help. Digital.ai Agility can be improved mainly by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible and intuitive. I would also like simpler integrations with third-party tools and easier configurations of automated workflows. Better dependency visualizations and real-time alerts for delivery risk would help large teams identify blockers earlier. The user interface could also be simplified to make it easier for new users. Overall, these improvements would make day-to-day planning, reporting, and cross-team coordination more efficient. There are a few areas where improvements are needed. I would like to see further improvements in user experience and navigation, especially making commonly used features easier to access for new users. More intuitive dashboard customization, better dependency visualization, and simpler third-party integrations would also help.
GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"You can use Digital.ai Agility for automating your tasks and creating your dashboard."
"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 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 most valuable thing is kind of the whole package together."
"VersionOne delivers a total ALM solution for whether you are operating a single team, like Scrum and Kanban for IT operations, or implementing an agile enterprise approach, like SAFe."
"I prefer Agility out of the three applications we work with because it has the most flexibility and can work at a higher level."
"From reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."
"It has improved our testing designs and test reporting."
"Different modules (e.g. Requirements, Test Plan, Test Lab) provide traceability from requirements, test cases, and defects, along with project analysis in terms of progress via the dashboard reports."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"Life was made easy by shifting the MS Office documentation to the product."
"For any company that wants a mature, highly developed platform that is constantly improving and needs to survive audits, you must consider HP ALM solutions such as HP Quality Center."
"Test management for multiple products, risk-based testing, requirements mapping, and reporting."
 

Cons

"It was not supporting some plugins. We wanted to migrate data that we were already using."
"There is room for improvement in getting the analytics portion of the solution more integrated with the rest of it."
"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."
"Improve how to create and track releases. Currently, I have to create child projects."
"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."
"The user interface could also be simplified to make it easier for new users."
"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."
"The response from Digital.ai Agility is a little bit slow and could be faster."
"Certainly on the UI part, it has to be improved to make it user-friendly and more presentable."
"There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval."
"Lacks sufficient plug-ins."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support, and sometimes, we do not get responses from them."
"I'd like to see them move away from a desktop-type client and towards a web-based client, although we've also had ActiveX issues with web clients."
"The technical support is average. We aren't unhappy with them. However, we don't find them to be exceptional."
"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet."
"Backup strategy is lacking in QC. Once the QC server crashes, all your automation artifacts are unrecoverable."
 

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 an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."
"It has several limitations in adapting its agility easily."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
910,454 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Insurance Company
12%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Agility?
The response from Digital.ai Agility is a little bit slow and could be faster.
What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Agility?
My main use case for Digital.ai Agility is learning to create a dashboard and prompt engineering. I am trying to automate my tasks by automating the dashboard.
What advice do you have for others considering Digital.ai Agility?
You can use Digital.ai Agility for automating your tasks and creating your dashboard. I would rate this product an 8.
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.
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...
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.
 

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

 

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)
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Agility vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
910,454 professionals have used our research since 2012.