We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

IBM Rational Quality Manager vs Micro Focus ALM Quality Center comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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 is the RFT because it allows us to automate manual test cases.""It's very reliable as a solution.""Integration with the other professional tools is a very strong advantage, so that we can have a traceability between the requirements and defects in Rational Team Concert. That's the most important aspect."

More IBM Rational Quality Manager Pros →

"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side.""Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report.""Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable.""We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone.""You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this. It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product.""Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs""I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions.""The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pros →

Cons
"Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition.""I think it's fine from a performance perspective but usability is something that needs improvement.""Currently, the user interface needs to be more user-friendly."

More IBM Rational Quality Manager Cons →

"The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard.""ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers.""Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue.""Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. E.g., they have always stated that, "You can monitor and create requirements," but it has its limitations. That's why companies will choose another requirements management solution and import data from that source system into Quality Center. Micro Focus has also invested in an adapter between Dimensions RM and ALM via Micro Focus Connect. However, I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool. I feel what Micro Focus did is say, "Our strategy is not to improve these parts within the tool itself, but search for supported integrations within our own tool set." This has not been helpful.""The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT.""There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky.""If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great.""We are looking for more automation capabilities."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "Compared to the market, the price is high."
  • "Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."
  • "It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."
  • "Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."
  • "The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
  • "Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."
  • "I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."
  • "Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
  • More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer: 
    As a stand-alone test management tool, it's a good tool.
    Top Answer: 
    I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive.
    Top Answer: 
    Pricing could be improved as it's high-priced. I don't exactly know the pricing point, but previously, I know that it was really high so fewer people were able to use it for their projects. That's the… more »
    Ranking
    15th
    Views
    1,279
    Comparisons
    798
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    450
    Rating
    7.7
    1st
    Views
    16,153
    Comparisons
    9,832
    Reviews
    28
    Average Words per Review
    1,025
    Rating
    7.3
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rational Quality Manager
    HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    Learn More
    Overview
    IBM Rational Quality Manager is a collaborative hub for business-driven software and systems quality across virtually any platform and type of testing. This software helps teams share information seamlessly, use automation to accelerate project schedules and report on metrics for informed release decisions. Rational Quality Manager helps quality assurance teams collaborate by sharing project information and status updates seamlessly so team members can synchronize teamwork throughout the lifecycle. It helps them automate by reducing labor-intensive activities to accelerate project schedules. In addition, it helps them govern by understanding and reporting on project metrics enabling accurate, reliable and timely release decisions.

    Micro Focus ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass to govern software quality and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes. Designed for complex multi-application environments, organizations can achieve high efficiency in their testing and measure quality with a requirements-driven and risk-based testing approach. Advanced reporting provides a complete view across all releases to gain new insights and make informed decisions. With numerous deployment options, open integrations with common tools and strong data controls, ALM/Quality Center is a perfect choice for enterprises that need to enforce standards, ensure compliance and adapt to changing tools.

    Learn more:

    Offer
    Learn more about IBM Rational Quality Manager
    Learn more about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center
    Sample Customers
    Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company30%
    Comms Service Provider15%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Insurance Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company31%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise38%
    Large Enterprise50%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise73%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise78%
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Rational Quality Manager is ranked 15th in Test Management Tools with 3 reviews while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 29 reviews. IBM Rational Quality Manager is rated 7.6, while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Quality Manager writes "Has good integration with the other professional tools but usability needs improvement ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center writes "Makes it easy to go back and execute the same test every time with automation". IBM Rational Quality Manager is most compared with TestRail by Gurock, Tricentis qTest, Adaptavist Test Management for Jira, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud and TFS, whereas Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Silk Central. See our IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center report.

    See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Test Management Tools 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.