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

IBM DOORS 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:
 

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
Parasoft Development Testin...
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
14th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (19th), Test Management Tools (29th)
 

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 Parasoft Development Testing Platform is 0.3%, down from 0.3% 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.
Ujjwal Gupta - PeerSpot reviewer
A complete test management tool that facilitates developers' unit testing
Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time. This would reduce the execution time, helping achieve goals on time, and with less effort required. I use the different licenses to manage this issue and it can be controlled by different users for functional testing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is traceability. We can track every requirement, including what the stakeholder must do and component-level requirements."
"I would say that the best feature of the solution is that since everything is in one place, and if you make any changes, then they are recorded or tracked."
"IBM Rational DOORS keeps everything organized."
"When you install DOORS locally, you have the flexibility to do what you want with the solution. You can add functionality and do many things that you can't do with other tools or do well enough to satisfy your users' requirements."
"The next-generation features are good."
"I like being able to sort and categorize the requirements and the exporting functions."
"The solution is stable."
"The data logs are ver conveneint."
"The most valuable feature is code coverage."
"It really helps developers execute scenarios through DTP and share reports/results across the teams."
 

Cons

"The user interface for the Change Proposal System could be improved."
"It's difficult to set the code on the solution."
"They need to provide users with information on what options would be best for their setup."
"It could be more user-friendly. It's not a beautiful tool. The user interface is gray. It has only lists inside, and it's horrible when you want to add tables. It's tough to add tables and manage them. It also becomes difficult when you want to add images."
"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."
"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."
"IBM DOORS should cover all engineering functions seamlessly, not just requirement engineering."
"Enhancing security measures, particularly when handling multiple projects simultaneously, would be beneficial to prevent data loss within DOORS."
"The solution's speed has room for improvement."
"Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."
"The licensing cost is too high."
"I think it's expensive because you have to pay for the licenses to IBM and all that and maintain them."
"IBM is a bit too expensive in terms of pricing. Customers are paying a lot for the license, and the price is quite high for this kind of environment. It is quite high as compared to what we can get today with other solutions."
"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."
"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."
"I don't personally know what the numbers are. I just know that one of the reasons we've limited it to three seats is a function of cost."
"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."
"Costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 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%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 is your primary use case for Parasoft Development Testing Platform?
We use the Parasoft Development Testing Platform to verify code coverage for static analysis in our unit tests.
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

Rational DOORS
Parasoft Concerto, Parasoft DTP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
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 vs. Parasoft Development Testing Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.