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

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs OpenText AccuRev comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 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 Engineering Lifecycle M...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
12th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText AccuRev
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
22nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 3.8%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText AccuRev is 0.1%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

Juergen Albrecht - PeerSpot reviewer
Combining tools for effective data analysis while customization and integration need improvement
The most valuable feature is how IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) allows me to present to the customer what the actual software, even hardware, will do. It helps them gain an impression of the complexity of the functionality and find an easier way to decide whether to implement it. A picture says more than one thousand words, which is why I work with the combination of ELM and the specification of DOORS. The automation capabilities I built use column-based scripts for analysis to search, fetch, and transfer information. When I open modules, it automatically analyzes the changes since the last opening by me.
Sameh-Hablas - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps us with our compliance goals, native quality management systems and with the legacy systems in our organization
To improve the product, it needs some enhancement to the application's interface to be more user-friendly. The product has all the features that we need and we can depend upon it. My issue with the product is that it is not easy to use without a guide or a proper manual. That is my point. It is not very friendly to use. For example, we may need the application to be more friendly in other sorts of ways. If we have an integrated module that allows access to the features we want through one click, you do not need to make it two or three clicks on the screen. The interface can be better designed to easily provide access to the features you need. The feature I would like to see in the next release is just for it to be more friendly to use and to be like a smart application that intuits your movement through the application. It needs to be something that works smoothly and intelligent without any complicated navigation of screens.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is relatively easy to use and user-friendly once the setup is complete."
"The transition to a SaaS-based solution is a distinct advantage."
"We have something called the GC (global configuration), which is a unique feature compared to any other competitor we have in the ALM space."
"The solution is customizable."
"The planning feature is rich with Scrum concepts: Sprint, Sprint retrospective, the rules in the Scrum framework."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of the CPU usage on the dashboard."
"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."
"At the same time, if you're working from the architect or the designing team you, it's quite easy to manage the resources online."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is taking snapshots while doing the execution of the test cases."
"The solution is 100% scalable. It's much more scalable than the customer's capacity for implementing it. We do plan to increase usage ourselves."
"The product has all the features that we for application managementat a lower cost."
"The most valuable feature is the Business Process Testing feature, BPT, because it brings in the most revenue."
 

Cons

"The solution can improve in the development area and the customized applications."
"Improvement is needed in bridging DNG and Rhapsody and vice versa for better data exchange from both sides with some trigger technologies."
"The stability of this solution can be improved."
"The directory designer manager is uncivil. The design manager is clearly really unstable."
"IBM Rational ALM should remove the features not used by the customers and keep this product as lightweight as possible."
"The features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate."
"In the next release, we expect a traceability metrics configuration where we can configure the user stories. We also expect them to improve or simplify the query process."
"The interconnectivity between packages is a major support problem and can be improved."
"The pricing should be more competitive."
"In the next release, I would like to have a repository for the code which is embedded. Apart from that, it has everything I need."
"It is difficult to gain experience with the product because resources and documentation for learning are not available."
"What I'm missing from the solution is a repository for the code. Something like Git, for example. Some sort of depository for the code that is embedded."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is a little expensive and we had to pay extra to have them set it up for us."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. Many of our customers are not using all the features and this could be why our clients feel the price is too high."
"The solution is not cheap."
"IBM Rational ALM has both monthly and yearly licensing options."
"We have a contract, but I am not aware of the details."
"It is a lower cost than other top competetors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
24%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
12%
Transportation Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Rational ALM?
Improvement is needed in bridging DNG and Rhapsody and vice versa for better data exchange from both sides with some trigger technologies. This would provide a visual reminder of changes in a modul...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational ALM?
Most of my primary use cases involve the combination of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) ( /products/ibm-engineering-lifecycle-management-elm-reviews ) and DOORS, including both Classic D...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

IBM Engineering Rhapsody, Rational ALM, MKS
Micro Focus AccuRev, AccuRev
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst
Akcelerant, SDL, CSG, Avid Technology Inc., Azimuth Systems Inc, Drivecam, Endgame, f5 Networks, Follett Software, Hyland Software, Indanet, Kronos, McAfee
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText AccuRev and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.