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

GoCD vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

GoCD
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
22nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Build Automation (20th), Release Automation (16th)
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 November 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of GoCD is 1.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 8.5%, up from 4.5% 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 Management8.5%
GoCD1.6%
Other89.9%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

RajeshReddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Dev Ops Engineer at Infosys
The UI is colorful, but the user experience must be improved
We can see all the pipelines with a simple search. The UI is colorful. The user experience is very rich. The product is very easy to learn if we know a bit of the basics. If we have someone to show us how to use it, it is very easy.
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

"It has a user-friendly interface, which for free and open-source tools, the UI is really amazing and simple."
"The most notable aspect is its user interface, which we find to be user-friendly and straightforward for deploying and comprehending pipelines. We have the ability to create multiple pipelines, and in addition to that, the resource consumption is impressive."
"GoCD's open-source nature is valuable."
"Permission separations mean that we can grant limited permissions for each team or team member."
"The UI is colorful."
"After we switched to GO, each team can set-up their own delivery pipeline and run it themselves."
"In terms of value added it has more than achieved everything we wanted from it and more."
"The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs."
"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."
"It is beneficial for managing testing data and has integration with Excel, allowing us to download reports easily."
"Quality Center enables us to have a single library where people can reference back as we go through multiple releases."
"You should invest in Quality Center if you are looking for high visibility of project progress."
"Use all that this product can offer as there is no need to buy others that can do the same tasks that HP Quality Center does."
"Entering requirements and mapping of requirements with test cases, writing and execution of test cases and reporting defects, and generating customized reports are valuable features."
"Within thirty days the defect resolution time was reduced to 3.1 days and averaged 1.1 days over the next eighteen (18) months."
 

Cons

"The aspect that requires attention is the user management component. When integrating with BitLabs and authenticating through GitLab, there are specific features we desire. One important feature is the ability to import users directly from GitLab, along with their respective designations, and assign appropriate privileges based on that information. Allocating different privileges to users is a time-consuming process for us."
"It is difficult to assign different access levels because it relies on separate keys for developer and admin access, which could be simplified."
"The tool must be more user-friendly."
"The documentation really should be improved by including real examples and more setup cases."
"User management, Documentation, Advanced GUI functionality."
"GO doesn't come with a lot of out of the box features like other tools, don't expect that you can get it to work by clicking the NEXT button."
"It needs a feature for scheduling of automation scripts to run automatically."
"I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."
"We need to move test cases manually from Test Case module to Test Execution module. This consumes more manual interaction."
"Tighter integration between ALM and UFT, especially from a reporting perspective, for automation reporting. We currently run into reporting issues."
"It doesn't do Agile very well."
"The previous version of ALM had a greater functionality regarding test cases; now in ALM Octane we have only manual testing and integration with other tools."
"Expensive tool which could become an overload on the budget in the future."
"We operate in Sweden, and there are not so many Swedish people that know the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's an open-source and free tool."
"This is an open-source solution and it is inexpensive."
"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
"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."
"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
"This is an expensive solution."
"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."
"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"The licensing fee is a little expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

Adaptive ALM, Thoughtworks Go
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ancestry.com, Barclay Card, AutoTrader, BT Financial Group, Gamesys, Nike, Vodafone, Haufe Lexware, Medidata, Hoovers
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about GoCD vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.