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

IBM DOORS vs IBM DOORS Next 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM DOORS
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM DOORS Next
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 32.9%, down from 34.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM DOORS Next is 9.1%, up from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

SHRINIVAS ALAGERI - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a well-refined ASPICE template and satisfying requirement management features
IBM DOORS effectively synchronizes with Polarion. But suppose when Polarion is running on Linux and you want to integrate with IBM DOORS on Windows, that is when compatibility issues arise. For the aforementioned issue we often receive advise in our company to migrate Polarion to Windows before integration. IBM DOORS is a heavy-duty application compared to competitors such as PTC Integrity. Exporting an IBM DOORS module is highly time-consuming for its bulkiness. PTC Integrity is a lighter solution that allows the development of a gateway template. It's crucial to consider the use cases and the other vendors that need to be integrated before using IBM DOORS. Our company is a PTC competence center, so most of our customers are from PTC. The customer integrations our company deals with include modeling tools such as Simulink, MATLAB, and Integrity Modeler to synchronize documents. The digital threat maintenance between IOD and Windchill is also a crucial part of our organization's operations. The solution should be more compatible with thin clients, there should be focus on web-based clients who can be more effective in IBM DOORS. At our company, we don't want every customer to use the thick client format with the solution. I would like to witness the seamless integration of IBM DOORS with Windchill in the future version. The integrations in IBM DOORS should be web-based, I don't prefer to use multiple plug-ins. For example, I want to integrate IBM DOORS with MATLAB, Simulink and Jenkins effortlessly which is possible in Codebeamer. I want every feature of Codebeamer to be present in IBM DOORS in the future releases.
Roger Trackwell - PeerSpot reviewer
An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements
The biggest thing is that it shows cradle to grave traceability between the initial parent requirement and the lowest level, or what we call a CID, a critical item development spec. You can establish your verification plans in DOORS, and then as you get test results, you can put them in DOORS as a link or as a pointer to where that specific test resides on a company database. Then you can also write compliance rationale and add a column for coding, like pass, fail, green, yellow, red, meets, does not meet, partially meets, or whatever scoring criteria you want to use. Like I said, the best thing about it is that it provides you that visibility of your verification, allowing you to know how close you are to your pre-production activities, prototyping, go ahead, or whatever it is.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has the features of: traceability, configuration management, and user access."
"The shell scripting is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."
"Compared to other tools that I have used over the past 20 years, DOORS is the best of the best."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules."
"I really like the customization that can be done using the DOORS Extension Language (DXL)."
"I like being able to sort and categorize the requirements and the exporting functions."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Rational DOORS is the full requirements development and testing."
"There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."
"My company contacts the solution's technical support, and they are good and responsive."
"The solution has easy operation, is user-friendly, easily understood, and has better tracking for requirement management."
"It's web-based, so you don't have anything to install."
"The usability of IBM DOORS Next is very good, and the features are very good."
"One of the most valuable features is how you can tailor the modules."
"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 traceability matrix helps to view things better. It comes with different linking rules."
"The most valuable features are the versioning of requirements and the possibility to reuse them."
 

Cons

"It would be nice if it could be scaled-down so that it could be installed and implemented without much learning or training."
"Overall, the user experience should be enhanced."
"The performance could be improved. It doesn't run as smoothly as it could."
"There needs to be quicker access to tech support. When I have a two minute question that takes two minutes to answer, it shouldn't take me 45 minutes and/or a few days of callbacks to get to the right technical support person. It's unnecessary and frustrating for the user."
"It's difficult to set the code on the solution."
"The customer must also have the tool to import the changes and accept them as a part of the review."
"Complexity, performance, openness are the three areas that can be improved. The IBM architecture and specifically Jazz looks more complex. There are a lot of servers. It's quite complicated. The search capabilities lack in IBM Rational DOORS Classic for customers who have a database with a requirement of more than 25,000 records. For example, you can search easily for a module, but it's really difficult to look for keywords through the whole database because all the modules are separated into small components, which makes the search quite complex. This is something that's really annoying because when we want to make an impact analysis, we would like to analyze the product globally. It's quite difficult to manage. The fact that you can interact externally with data makes it complex. The approach is complex and doesn't work as expected. For example, when I tried to experiment with exporting some records, the tool crashed, but I couldn't find out the root cause, that is, whether it happened because of Rational Windows or lack of memory. It was just crashing. Logs weren't very clear. IBM can try to use more recent technology for different aspects and make it easy. They can also provide free integration from DOORS Classic to DOORS. Currently, all the customization in Excel is lost, which makes it very complex. It would be a feature to make new versions compatible with features in the past versions."
"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now."
"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."
"It does have a tendency to condense the requirements. It kind of puts them in a tree format. Sometimes those trees are a little difficult."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is not a very user-friendly product."
"There is room for improvement in the APIs that they have exposed for integration."
"I have come to the conclusion that if you are considering migrating from DOORS to DNG, don't! Instead of spending 100's to 1000's of hours doing migrations, invest those hours in a DXL programmer to make DOORS do what it isn't doing for you now."
"When you are in Jira or Confluence, you have some freedom in how you type in text. That's also a weakness of Confluence, however, as it opens the doors to sloppy work. In DOS Next Generation, the text is very rigorous, but it might be difficult for people who don't have the discipline. Having a way to quickly enter requirements could help. It might already be in there, but I don't know. I don't have enough experience with the tool yet."
"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 user."
"The only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have to pay for a license. I think it's a one-time payment as my company hasn't notified me about more charges. I don't think it's expensive for large corporations, but it will be costly for an average person."
"It's expensive."
"The licensing cost is too high."
"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."
"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."
"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."
"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."
"IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price"
"If the product price were not reasonable enough, our company would not use IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."
"The price of this solution is very high, and it increases year after year."
"The cost of maintenance is €20,000 to €30,000 ($22,000 to $33,000 USD) and there are no additional fees."
"You are going to need a beefy server and a fat network pipe to it in order to make DNG and its companion tools work well for users."
"Users can buy a three-year license for about 12,000 Euros."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
856,874 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
27%
Computer Software Company
9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
22%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS?
The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?
Over the years, the first version cost something around 5800 euros.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS?
Compared to today, DOORS' competitors also excel in this discipline. Yet the price is too high. It's often not as generic as it used to be. IBM promised to find a way for a generic format that allo...
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 pricing is considered unreasonable, and there is speculation that IBM may not be putting much effort into further development, possibly treating it as a cash cow.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
The improvement for IBM DOORS Next is related to the exportation of documents. We had to install an additional tool to export Word documents. We needed additional tools, and the whole exploitation ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Rational DOORS
Rational DOORS Next Generation, RDNG, Rational Requirements Composer and IBM RRC
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
Major health insurer
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,874 professionals have used our research since 2012.