We performed a comparison between GitLab and IBM Engineering Workflow Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Atlassian and others in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools."I like that it's easy to deploy our services over GitLab. The customer support is also good with a really active community. You have a lot of support that you can get online with your stack. That is probably one of the benefits of using GitLab. It's also really fast."
"The initial setup of GitLab is pretty simple, with no complications."
"I like GitLab's security and SAS tools."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution's most valuable feature is that it is compatible with GitHub. The product's integration capabilities are sufficient for our small company of 35 people."
"I have had no problem with the stability of the solution."
"This is a scalable solution. We had around 200 users working with it."
"For us, Gitlab's most valuable feature is the integration with Cypress. We're using Cypress as an automation tool, so we're using GitLab as a tool for running in parallel."
"Good for managing stories, sprints, hydration and releases."
"Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"All of the features work together to provide a powerful holistic solution - from the dashboard all the way through to security."
"We can track the status of test cases (passed or saved) in a single view. Based on releases and other attributes, we generate various reports and extract metrics from the data."
"Agile templates give us a standard methodology for every Agile project. Also, the ability to create our own object types and linkages to features/epics allows us to enhance the verification of feature readiness."
"Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly. We do most of our operations through the website interface but it could be better."
"GitLab's Windows version is yet not available and having this would be an improvement."
"The integration could be slightly better."
"I'm new to GitLab, so I would appreciate more documentation about the code and commands."
"GitLab would be improved with the addition of templates for deployment on local PCs."
"We would like to generate document pages from the sources."
"GitLab could improve by having more plugins and better user-friendliness."
"I would like to see better integration with project management tools such as Jira."
"Lacks ability to customize and reporting can be slow."
"We have encountered issues with stability. We have seen where the entire system kind of goes for a toss when certain people use certain types of queries, which are very costly. Then the system kind of slows down a bit, and we have to monitor it."
"Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."
"Some administrative tasks are difficult to perform. These could be simplified."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
GitLab is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 70 reviews while IBM Engineering Workflow Management is ranked 10th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 14 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while IBM Engineering Workflow Management is rated 6.8. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Engineering Workflow Management writes "Offers good traceability elements but UI needs improvement ". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, SonarQube and Tekton, whereas IBM Engineering Workflow Management is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Codebeamer, Polarion ALM and Endevor.
See our list of best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Agile Planning 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.
