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

IBM DOORS vs Inflectra SpiraTest comparison

IBM and Inflectra are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. IBM is ranked #1 with an average rating of 7.5, while Inflectra is ranked #12. IBM holds a 33.2% mindshare in ARM, compared to Inflectra’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 76% of Inflectra users who would recommend it.
IBM DOORS
Read 55 IBM DOORS reviews
  • 7,625 Views
  • 5,215 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
Inflectra SpiraTest
Read 25 Inflectra SpiraTest reviews
  • 193 Views
  • 96 Comparison Views
76% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

IBM DOORS and Inflectra SpiraTest compete in requirements management and testing. SpiraTest typically has an advantage due to its pricing and wide range of features.

Features: IBM DOORS provides excellent requirements traceability, impact analysis, and customizations via the Dynamic Extension Language (DXL). SpiraTest offers a comprehensive test management suite, easy setup, and intuitive reporting with strong integration capabilities.

Room for Improvement: IBM DOORS needs better integration and user-friendliness, with criticisms regarding its outdated interface. SpiraTest users desire more report flexibility, enhanced integration guidance, and a modernized interface.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM DOORS is mainly deployed on-premises, whereas SpiraTest offers deployment on both public and private clouds, providing greater flexibility. IBM receives mixed feedback on customer service, while SpiraTest users generally find their service efficient and helpful.

Pricing and ROI: IBM DOORS has a complex licensing model suitable for larger enterprises but delivers high ROI in large projects. SpiraTest is considered more affordable, offering excellent value for smaller teams, with a strong reputation for cost-efficiency.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest Report (Updated: April 2025).
Buyer's Guide
IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest
April 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 849,686 peers since 2012

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
Inflectra SpiraTest
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
12th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (25th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 33.2%, down from 34.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Inflectra SpiraTest is 0.5%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

UweSeufert - PeerSpot reviewer
Old but capable of storing, organizing, and exchanging requirements
I use IBM DOORS because my customer wants it for managing their requirements IBM DOORS is a tool from the 20th century. It is very old but capable of storing, organizing, and exchanging requirements. It helps to manage requirements efficiently, which significantly improves the way requirements…
Read full review
Jason Lopez - PeerSpot reviewer
Intuitive enough and easy to learn, but in terms of folder organization, it could be better
Inflectra SpiraTest is the new kid on the block compared to Jira and Azure. Still, when I started exploring the tool, I realized that it was no different from other tools I've used in the past, but it all boils down to adaptability because the features would always be more or less the same. I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it.
Read full review

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 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."
"The platform's traceability capabilities are invaluable. They provide a solid foundation for certification processes and manage requirement changes across project lifecycles."
"The shell scripting is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"I like being able to sort and categorize the requirements and the exporting functions."
"I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements."
"Very customizable and can be as powerful as you want it to be."
"The most valuable feature is the management verification and login."
More IBM DOORS pros
"The ability to reuse test cases already used across projects is the most valuable feature of this solution. We don't need to create new ones."
"The features of this product most valuable to me were the test case management and the visual status, by which it was displayed."
"Inflectra SpiraTest has a lot of functionality, which is good."
"The user-friendly features are the most valuable. For example, migration of requirements and migration of test cases and the creation of traceability. You have various reports that you need. The plug-ins that are available to connect with the other tools."
"I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it."
"We were able to add a step-by-step procedure for someone to follow to assist in testing."
"The reporting functionality helps vendors and technical resources identify bugs and issues that need to be addressed. The simple dashboard-style home page makes training end-user testers simple and straightforward. The actual testing UI is VERY straightforward and very intuitive for the end-users that test the system since very often we pull from business and operational users to help test new systems."
 

Cons

"The problem is that because the GUI is so bad, you either have to spend a lot of money customizing the interface yourself, or a lot of money on training."
"Enhancing security measures, particularly when handling multiple projects simultaneously, would be beneficial to prevent data loss within DOORS."
"One of the things that many people complain about is it's hard to manage attributes. For example, tables or figures. This is something that can be improved."
"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."
"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them."
"Overall, the user experience should be enhanced."
"I would like to see them improve in agile management the Scrum/Kanban Board to work with overseas team members."
"It would be helpful if Microsoft provided a more user-friendly interface for updating and querying updates. Additionally, if there was a way for users to notify developers of any changes in requirements, it would allow for faster and more efficient updates to the solution's architecture. This could be in the form of a notification system that alerts developers of any changes that need to be made. Additionally, the solution is document-driven and it should be more digital."
More IBM DOORS cons
"The user interface is slightly complicated and not very consistent. It could be more user friendly."
"It should develop integration with JIRA. We have some complexities which caused us not to decide to integrate it with our JIRA, like synchronous data."
"The folder organization in Inflectra SpiraTest could be better, though I cannot comment whether that is structure-related. Most of what I need would probably be in the tool, but as a test manager, I need to be able to create dashboards and reports easily."
"Migrating is not very easy. It depends on the organization, how efficient and effective the decision-making process is. The plug-ins should be easier and more integrated rather than the user trying to integrate the tools which are more popular, like Jira et al."
"Being able to add scripting for testing can and does save a lot of time. When you are able to just ‘run’ a test case rather than manually add it and run it."
"The UI for managing test cases, test sets, test runs could be a little more integrated, currently, these feel disjointed at times and confusing. Also, the test steps page needs to display the test steps closer to the top of the UI so as to not have to scroll down to find."
"Two areas that can stand improvement: integration with third party products and making it more intuitive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with one being very affordable and ten being quite expensive."
"It is expensive to onboard additional users."
"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."
"It's expensive."
"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."
"I think it's expensive because you have to pay for the licenses to IBM and all that and maintain them."
"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."
"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."
More IBM DOORS pricing and cost advice
"I Googled the pricing for Inflectra SpiraTest, and it's about $4,000 annually."
"The pricing was excellent. I would recommend the enterprise solution."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
849,686 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%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Real Estate/Law Firm
8%
 

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.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?
Over the years, the first version cost something around 5800 euros.
See all answers
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...
See all answers
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

Jira vs IBM DOORS Logo
Jira vs IBM DOORS
Compared 25% of the time
Polarion Requirements vs IBM DOORS Logo
Polarion Requirements vs IBM DOORS
Compared 24% of the time
Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS Logo
Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS
Compared 24% of the time
IBM DOORS Next vs IBM DOORS Logo
IBM DOORS Next vs IBM DOORS
Compared 10% of the time
PTC Integrity Requirements Connector vs IBM DOORS Logo
PTC Integrity Requirements Connector vs IBM DOORS
Compared 5% of the time
More IBM DOORS Competitors
No data available
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
IBM DOORS
April 2025
IBM DOORS reportDownload IBM DOORS product report
Buyer's Guide
Inflectra SpiraTest
April 2025
Inflectra SpiraTest reportDownload Inflectra SpiraTest product report
 

Also Known As

Rational DOORS
SpiraTest, Spira
 

Overview

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS (DOORS) is a Requirements Management (RM) software designed to help organizations manage engineering project requirements throughout the development lifecycle. It provides a central location for capturing, defining, and organizing project requirements, facilitating communication and collaboration among stakeholders like engineers, system designers, and customers. Key features include requirements traceability, version control, and impact analysis, ensuring effective implementation and testing. DOORS improves efficiency, enhances communication, reduces risks, and supports better decision-making through clear visibility into requirements. Compared to its newer, web-based counterpart DOORS Next, the mature DOORS 9 offers a wider range of features with a traditional user interface but lacks web-based functionality and modern integration with IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) tools.

IBM
SpiraTest is an integrated Requirements and Quality Management solution that manages your project's Requirements, Test Cases, Releases, Defects and Issues in one environment, with complete traceability throughout. After defining your project's requirements, you generate the test cases and test steps that validate the functionality. The test execution modules allows users to run through the tests, logging defects/issues as they go. SpiraTest is Fully Web-Based. Free 30-Day Trial.
Inflectra
 

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
- Morningstar - Deutsch Bank - Sopra Group - Booz Allen & Hamilton - UBS - US Government
Buyer's Guide
IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest
April 2025
Free Report: IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.

We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.