IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs OpenText Software Delivery Management comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category. IBM is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.5, while OpenText is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.3. IBM holds a 3.5% mindshare in ALM, compared to OpenText’s 6.0% mindshare. Additionally, 76% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle M...

Read 19 IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) reviews

1,447 Views
1,003 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

OpenText Software Delivery ...

Read 41 OpenText Software Delivery Management reviews

3,963 Views
2,200 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

IBM Engineering Lifecycle M...

OpenText Software Delivery ...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management and OpenText Software Delivery Management compete in project lifecycle management. ELM holds an edge in integration capabilities, while OpenText is noted for its flexible deployment options, aligning with cloud strategies.

Features: ELM excels in tool integration and traceability features, enhancing streamlined workflows. It offers strong collaboration, allowing requirement, development, and testing lifecycle traceability. OpenText enhances team collaboration via real-time analytics and supports Agile management with customizable Kanban components and workflow tools.

Room for Improvement: ELM could improve on simplifying its deployment process and slightly enhancing collaboration features. There may also be a need for more customizable analytics to aid smaller teams. OpenText could benefit from expanding its integration capabilities and enhancing its traceability of project metrics. Improving support for on-premise deployments and refining its Agile management tools could also be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Software Delivery Management provides a cloud-based deployment model, facilitating scalability and straightforward updates. ELM's on-premise setup is more complex but is supported by reliable customer service, offering assistance during the deployment process. OpenText’s cloud-first approach contrasts with ELM’s traditional methods.

Pricing and ROI: ELM features a higher initial setup cost due to its extensive features, yet promises long-term ROI through effective project management. OpenText poses a more economical upfront cost with flexible pricing, attractive for smaller organizations seeking steady returns on investment.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 857,688 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 Engineering Lifecycle M...

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

12th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Software Delivery ...

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

7th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 3.5%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Software Delivery Management is 6.0%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Featured Reviews

Juergen Albrecht

Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH

Combining tools for effective data analysis while customization and integration need improvement

The most valuable feature is how IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) ( /products/ibm-engineering-lifecycle-management-elm-reviews ) 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.

Read full review

GeorgNauerz

Managing Partner at Georg Nauerz Consulting

A stable tool for sprint planning, test management, quality management, and automated testing

I think the area of release management in the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required. In general, the connection between releases and scrum teams needs improvement, as it could be optimized owing to its linkages, making it very uncomfortable as soon as you have strong teams or scrum teams that work with different items over several releases. In future product releases, the solution needs to focus a bit more on the metric part. The product's dashboard is a metric for productivity and process control.

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's easy to use."

"The transition to a SaaS-based solution is a distinct advantage."

"Everyone in a team can work on the same platform and share the same information."

"The cataloging is a very valuable feature. For a lot of enterprises, they end up not knowing which applications do specific features. The cataloging helps with this. It's not that verbose, but it still gives you allowances to put in more detail."

"One of the key advantages of IBM Rational ALM is its workflow capabilities, which enable seamless collaboration between development and production teams and ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the progress and readiness of the solution. Additionally, the solution is good for integration."

"I would rate the stability of this product a nine out of ten."

"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."

"The planning feature is rich with Scrum concepts: Sprint, Sprint retrospective, the rules in the Scrum framework."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) pros

"It is a very stable tool. The tool has been in the industry for so many years. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the reports. We are able to do customization."

"There are a lot of predefined reports. We can attach additional reports for users, like who worked on what defect and when, as well as what is the status of the release compared to the previous release. It is really endless. All the data is really linked together. Then, if all the data is linked together, there is an option to prepare reports out of it. We are very impressed with its reporting capabilities."

"The dashboards and metric reporting are valuable features."

"The integration capability of ALM Octane was very straightforward. We had a supporting team, and they provided us with detailed documentation."

"The integration points are very good. Octane gives us a window not only into our manual testing, but also our automation testing and our performance testing. We can see all results from all three streams of testing in one place."

"The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions."

"The user experience is a lot better than any tool that I have used before. Overall, it is great. It has a smooth interface, which is very user-friendly. It makes it easier to work together and have more transparency and customization, which is very good."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management pros

Cons

"The interconnectivity between packages is a major support problem and can be improved."

"I would like to see better reporting features. The out-of-box reporting is - I don't want to say limited - but the focus is on the Scrum and Sprint reports. We need more reporting features regarding the history of the work, tracking it more deeply."

"The user interface requires significant improvement as it is overly complex."

"The stability of IBM Rational ALM could be improved."

"The directory designer manager is uncivil. The design manager is clearly really unstable."

"There is not enough beginner support material in the form of FAQs or simple training to help you get started."

"I think nowadays people are getting into Jira and other tools. What is happening is, this solution is becoming more traditional, whereas Jira and other tools are more attractive for the new users to learn and start using because of the graphical interfaces."

"Improvement is needed in bridging DNG and Rhapsody and vice versa for better data exchange from both sides with some trigger technologies."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) cons

"We’d like to see Platform One/Iron Bank compliant containers."

"Globally, I don't see many major points of improvement. It's mostly plenty of little things, and it's weird to me that they are not in the product yet. They are really details, but they're annoying details... Today, in the tool, we've got plenty of assets we can handle, like requirements, user storage, defects, tasks and so on. And to all of those elements, we can add comments. We can add comments to any asset in Octane but not to tasks. It's just impossible to understand why it's not available for the tasks because it's available everywhere else. Similarly, for attachments, you can attach files absolutely everywhere except on automated runs, which is, again, awkward. I don't understand why on this element, in particular, you cannot do it. It's little touches like that."

"They don't support all IDEs yet. We have Visual Studio code, which is not supported, and loved by our developers. This integration is missing. We also had to do our own in-house integration with the Confluence. That is also something that they could add."

"Also, while there is a Requirements Module in Octane, it is very plain. It's okay to have some requirements described there, but it's not really following the whole BDD approach. I would like to have more features for requirements in there."

"It would help us if ALM Octane got FedRAMP-certified, so our government departments could use the cloud solution. That way our external consultants could access it. We've created a URL to get to it, but if it were FedRAMP-certified and service and had support in the continental United States, that would be better."

"I think the area of release management in the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"When I manage projects that are being created in ALM, I have a standard template, but I don't have a template for them in Octane. I literally have to create the project from the ground up every time, which for an administrator, is a nightmare solution"

"What could be improved in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its integration with Jira."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a contract, but I am not aware of the details."

"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."

"IBM Rational ALM has both monthly and yearly licensing options."

"The solution is not cheap."

"I would say that it is an affordable product. There is an annual service fee, which is one of the additional payments to be made apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution."

"It will be as expensive as ALM.NET, if not more expensive. But here's a good tip: If you have ALM.NET, you are able to share your licenses from ALM.NET to Octane. You just have to define a dedicated number of licenses on ALM.NET and then you can share them with ALM Octane, with some configuration effort. This is something that you have to take into account, that there is a possibility of such license sharing that could decrease your costs. Compared to open-source tools, the price the ALM Octane is definitely higher, in terms of the licensing cost."

"In my opinion, it's good value for the price that you pay."

"The price of Micro Focus ALM Octane is too high compared to other solutions."

"I rate the tool's pricing an eight on a scale from one to ten, where ten is very expensive."

"The solution has reduced our testing costs."

"I rate the product price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. The product is neither cheap nor expensive."

"If you compare the price with the functionality, it is pretty much the same as other solutions. If you compare it to Jira, for instance, it has a lot more functionality. You don't need any plug-ins, but it's also more expensive. Once you start adding your different plug-ins to Jira, you'll probably end up with the same amount or more. There is also a yearly support cost, which is usually 25% of the initial cost of the license."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

25%

Computer Software Company

15%

Government

11%

Transportation Company

Financial Services Firm

25%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational ALM?

The solution is customizable.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Is Jira better or would you go with Micro Focus ALM Octane?

Hi Netanya, Basically , it all depends on the use cases for your environment and the business needs. Hope the below data may be relevant to you for identifying your needs and deciding on the approp...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Octane?

The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Octane?

OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product. However, it offsets costs by saving time and money, thus creating a balance between expenses and benefits. Our organization with over 1500 users sees sa...

See all answers

Comparisons

Jira vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 27% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 18% of the time

Codebeamer vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 18% of the time

Polarion ALM vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 3% of the time

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) Competitors

Jira vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 47% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 26% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 8% of the time

TFS vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Software Delivery Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

June 2025

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) report

Download IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Software Delivery Management

May 2025

OpenText Software Delivery Management report

Download OpenText Software Delivery Management product report

Also Known As

IBM Engineering Rhapsody, Rational ALM, MKS

Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane

Overview

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management stands out for its robust Agile Scrum planning, lifecycle traceability, and tool management, offering cloud-based configurability and strong collaboration features.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management provides rich capabilities for Agile project management, facilitating requirements and test management, configuration management, and version control. Its integration with IBM Doors supports comprehensive requirements handling, and the cloud-based platform enhances collaborative efficiency across teams. Despite needing advances in user-friendliness and reporting, ELM's global configuration and compliance features make it invaluable in demanding environments.

What are the key features of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management?

Scrum-based planning: Supports Agile methodologies with rich planning tools.
Lifecycle traceability: Offers complete traceability across development stages.
Customizable workflows: Adaptable workflows with Kanban for flexibility.
Git integration: Supports efficient version control and collaboration.
Global Configuration: Manages complex configurations globally.
Compliance and reporting: Ensures robust auditing and comprehensive reporting capabilities.

What benefits should be evaluated in reviews?

Collaboration: Enhanced sharing across platforms for seamless teamwork.
Cost-effectiveness: Delivers efficient tools that optimize project spend.
Comprehensive requirement handling: Facilitates detailed requirement management through IBM Doors integration.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management is vital in sectors like automotive and manufacturing, where it implements Agile frameworks to manage requirements, conduct testing, and handle defects. It integrates into development pipelines ensuring live traceability and visibility, supporting critical engineering processes efficiently.

IBM

OpenText Software Delivery Management provides application lifecycle management with Agile and Waterfall support. It features intuitive interfaces, CI/CD integration, automated testing, and robust reporting, improving project management efficiency and usability.

Designed to enhance teams' productivity and streamline processes, OpenText Software Delivery Management integrates seamlessly with Agile methodologies. Its comprehensive backlog and requirements management, user stories, and test management make it a complete tool for managing the development lifecycle. The platform aligns with DevOps, providing traceability and extensive customization options. Traceability from requirements to deployments is enhanced, making it easier for teams to track progress. It offers integration with popular tools like Jenkins and JIRA, ensuring a unified approach to continuous delivery and testing management.

What key features does OpenText Software Delivery Management include?

Versatile across browsers with consistent performance.
Seamless CI/CD integration for smooth development processes.
Intuitive interface aiding in efficiency and ease of use.
Comprehensive backlog management ensures organized prioritization.
Automated testing aligns with Agile and DevOps principles.

What benefits can users expect when evaluating OpenText Software Delivery Management?

Enhanced traceability from inception to delivery.
Improved project management efficiency through streamlined processes.
Robust reporting capabilities offering detailed insights.
Increased flexibility in customization enabling tailored experiences.
Predictive analytics for better decision-making.

OpenText Software Delivery Management is implemented across technology-focused industries, supporting Agile processes like requirements management and defect tracking. Organizations use it to standardize development workflows and optimize continuous delivery integration, choosing it for its ability to support both Agile and Waterfall methodologies within application lifecycle management.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst

Orange, Airbus, Haufe Group, Kellogg's, Claro, Bon Secours, World Wide Technology

Buyer's Guide

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management

June 2025

Free Report: IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management report.

See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.

We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.