Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Digital.ai Agility vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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
6
Ranking in other categories
Release Automation (18th), Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (11th), Value Stream Management Software (9th)
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Agility is 1.9%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 5.5%, up from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

Debbie Brey - PeerSpot reviewer
A scalable, full-package solution with a tech support team that bends over backwards to help
There is room for improvement in getting the analytics portion of the solution more integrated with the rest of it. The feature I would like to see is already in their newer licensing structure, and that's the live integration between Agility, Jira and Azure DevOps. That's the piece that I think is really valuable.
Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities
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 bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 allows my clients to have one central tool to manage their agile projects."
"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 product's initial setup phase is easy."
"ALM is a well-known product and is one of the pioneers in providing test management facilities with a 360 degree view of requirements."
"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."
"Being able to manage tests as this is something very difficult to find in other products."
"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"It is beneficial for managing testing data and has integration with Excel, allowing us to download reports easily."
"You can do your development from start to finish: starting with the requirements, ending with defects, and testing in-between."
 

Cons

"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."
"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 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."
"The UI is very dated. Most applications these days have a light UI that can be accessed by pretty much any browser; QC still uses a UI which has a look almost the same for the past 20 years."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"The UFT tests don't work very well and it seems to depend on things as simple as the screen resolution on a machine that I've moved to."
"Currently, what's missing in the solution is the ability for users to see the ongoing scenarios and the status of those scenarios versus the requirements. As for the management tools, they also need to be improved so users can have a better idea of what's going on in just one look, so they can manage testing activities better."
"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."
"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."
"The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac."
"There are great features, however, transitioning between partners and managing a large number of test cases can be time-consuming."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You get what you pay for. Don't let your development teams dictate what the portfolio management team should use as the main tool."
"Comparing the pricing to other products, I think this solution is in the middle."
"HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
"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 pricing is expensive nowadays."
"The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."
"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."
"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."
"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
18%
Insurance Company
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Educational Organization
30%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

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.
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...
 

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
 

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: July 2025.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.