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

IBM DOORS Next vs Parasoft Development Testing Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.5
Organizations implemented IBM DOORS Next quickly, reducing documentation costs, but financial recovery took three to four years.
Sentiment score
6.8
The Parasoft Development Testing Platform improved code quality, reduced bugs, saved resources, and increased profitability by enhancing compliance and efficiency.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
IBM DOORS Next support is praised for responsiveness and expertise, though resolution speed and preferences for internal support vary.
Sentiment score
6.0
Parasoft Development Testing Platform is praised for knowledgeable, prompt support, effective communication, and helpful documentation, ensuring excellent customer service.
I did not use IBM technical support; instead, my assistance comes from friendships developed over more than 25 to 26 years with developer colleagues in the US, UK, and elsewhere.
Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH
We are happy with the technical support from IBM.
Senior Mechanical Design Engineer at Pricol Limited
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
IBM DOORS Next is scalable, efficiently handling complex projects and large user loads across servers without major capacity issues.
Sentiment score
5.4
Parasoft Development Testing Platform is praised for its scalability, seamless integration, and robustness in handling large, complex projects.
The whole company, at least the development department, used the solution.
System Engineer at Toll Collect GmbH
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.8
IBM DOORS Next is generally stable and powerful but faces performance and integration challenges with large data and Jazz tools.
Sentiment score
6.9
Parasoft Development Testing Platform is praised for its stability, reliability, seamless integration, excellent support, and efficient performance under varied conditions.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM DOORS Next faces usability and efficiency challenges due to outdated UI, limited Agile integration, and lacks AI features.
Parasoft Development Testing Platform requires better integration, documentation, performance optimization, training resources, frequent updates, and responsive technical support.
In my opinion, IBM DOORS Next does not have any Agile support, and that is why for requirement analysis, IBM DOORS Next is correct, but for someone who is working in an Agile process, IBM DOORS Next is not the solution because it is not integrated into the Agile working process.
System Engineer at Toll Collect GmbH
Developing a modular architecture that suits smaller and mid-sized projects would be beneficial.
Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH
 

Setup Cost

IBM DOORS Next is considered costly and complex, with high maintenance fees and significant server resource requirements.
Parasoft Development Testing Platform offers comprehensive capabilities with flexible pricing, noted for higher costs but robust support and training.
I give eight points only because the price is a bit high.
Senior Mechanical Design Engineer at Pricol Limited
 

Valuable Features

IBM DOORS Next excels in integration, traceability, scalability, and requirement management, with strong support for regulated industries and auditing.
Users praise Parasoft for its strong reporting, automation, CI/CD integration, vulnerability detection, and customizable, intuitive workflows enhancing code quality.
The power, performance, and accuracy of this tool are excellent according to all clients, even though pricing is not a point of contention.
Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH
The solution has easy operation, is user-friendly, easily understood, and has better tracking for requirement management.
Senior Mechanical Design Engineer at Pricol Limited
The traceability feature in IBM DOORS Next is very good to use during the coverage analysis.
System Engineer at Toll Collect GmbH
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM DOORS Next
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Parasoft Development Testin...
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
16th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (20th), Test Management Tools (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS Next is 8.2%, up from 8.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft Development Testing Platform is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM DOORS Next8.2%
Parasoft Development Testing Platform1.0%
Other90.8%
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

Juergen Albrecht - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH
Has supported complex industry migrations and helps ensure compliance but needs more intuitive usability for occasional users
It is difficult to explain my opinion on IBM DOORS Next; the usability is not as good as I expected, and it is very complex and complicated. It is not a bad tool if you understand how it works, but from the perspective of engineers who only use IBM DOORS Next approximately several times a month but not permanently, it is not very comfortable or intuitive to use. The implementation, migration, and configuration need more user-friendly usability, perhaps through on-site guidance or intuitive use with push button functions, which might be more comfortable, because at the moment, it looks very complex, and ordinary engineers often mention that they have to work with this tool but would not choose to. Simplifying IBM DOORS Next would not be a bad idea. From my perspective and connections with friends at IBM in Switzerland, I gain access to very good background information that helps me satisfy my clients. However, if I had not had these contacts, I might have felt lost inside the tool chain. I am really satisfied as long as I can get help, but I believe it would be a great benefit if the tool itself offered more intuitive push-button functions and similar enhancements. The pricing of the tool itself does not actually matter because the power, performance, and accuracy of this tool are excellent, and that is not the point of contention. All clients agree that the tool is not bad, but the complexity is an issue since it creates a situation where you feel lost while working with it. The intuitive usability that we learned from Classic DOORS is simply not the same. I understand that the complexity has grown, yet I believe it would not be a bad idea if IBM considered splitting or breaking down IBM DOORS Next into two options or, better yet, developing a modular architecture that suits smaller and mid-sized projects. For larger projects with a lot of subsystems, it makes sense to use the full range of the tool, but for startups or mid-sized companies, it would be beneficial if they could select modules according to their needs. More visible on-site automatic help would be beneficial. For instance, if you need to move something, as you use the mouse cursor, an automatic message could pop up asking what you would like to do so that you can select within that context, and it would automatically perform the task. Modern software development recognizes that this type of modifying usability makes life much easier for users. Many have mentioned that whether it is Rhapsody, DOORS, or IBM DOORS Next, the issue is they work only a few times a month and are not professionals with these tools, which leads them to contact me for assistance. It would not be a bad idea for IBM to make this tool more handy, efficient, and user-friendly since most users do not work full days or even months on these tasks and are not familiar with the complete usability.
ES
Sr. Software Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Provides 100 percent code coverage, is stable, and scalable
We use the Parasoft Development Testing Platform to verify code coverage for static analysis in our unit tests Our customers require that we perform static analysis and have no critical high errors. We must also have 100 percent code coverage for my test to verify that everything is good and…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
879,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
23%
Government
9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
7%
Healthcare Company
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The tr...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
The solution is slightly high in terms of affordability. I give eight points only because the price is a bit high, which is the only problem since I am the purchasing person, but not the technical ...
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
It is difficult to explain my opinion on IBM DOORS Next; the usability is not as good as I expected, and it is very complex and complicated. It is not a bad tool if you understand how it works, but...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Rational DOORS Next Generation, RDNG, Rational Requirements Composer and IBM RRC
Parasoft Concerto, Parasoft DTP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Major health insurer
General Motors, Lockheed Martin, Qualcomm, AAI Textron, Boeing, Fidelity, Johnson & Johnson, CIBC, Penske, Thales, Dell, 
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS Next vs. Parasoft Development Testing Platform and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.