Inflectra SpiraTeam vs OpenText Software Delivery Management comparison

Inflectra and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category. Inflectra is ranked #20, while OpenText is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.3. Inflectra holds a 0.3% mindshare in ALM, compared to OpenText’s 5.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Inflectra users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Inflectra SpiraTeam

Read 2 Inflectra SpiraTeam reviews

293 Views
290 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Software Delivery ...

Read 41 OpenText Software Delivery Management reviews

3,651 Views
3,505 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Inflectra SpiraTeam

OpenText Software Delivery ...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

OpenText Software Delivery Management and Inflectra SpiraTeam are software solutions competing in project management and software delivery. Inflectra SpiraTeam seems to have a slight edge due to well-rounded features and customer satisfaction, despite OpenText's advantages in certain aspects.

Features: OpenText Software Delivery Management offers comprehensive project tracking, resource management, and integration capabilities. Inflectra SpiraTeam provides robust test management, agile project management, and traceability for development and QA teams.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Software Delivery Management provides extensive enterprise-level deployment support with comprehensive resources. Inflectra SpiraTeam offers streamlined cloud-based deployment with strong support and documentation.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Software Delivery Management has a higher initial setup cost targeting large enterprises. Inflectra SpiraTeam is more affordable, offering better ROI for small to mid-sized organizations with appealing pricing tiers.

To learn more, read our detailed Inflectra SpiraTeam vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra SpiraTeam vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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

Inflectra SpiraTeam

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

20th

Average Rating

9.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

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 August 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Inflectra SpiraTeam is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Software Delivery Management is 5.8%, 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

it_user1241541

Quality Management Office (QMO) Manager at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees

Great technical support with excellent integration and a fairly easy initial setup

The integration is really better than it was in the past. The initial setup was pretty simple. Their documentation is excellent. The solution is fast and very accessible. Organization time is free of charge in terms of licensing. This is until you finalize the migration from one tool to the other. That way, we don't need to pay to license two solutions at the same time. The maintenance team doing the support gives you a lot of knowledge. They often have up to ten years of support experience. Those leading the support teams are very knowledgeable. There seems to be very little turnover or team change, which helps retain the knowledge

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

"The solution is fast and very accessible."

"The initial setup and configuration are straightforward and relatively simple."

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

"I like the fact that you can use it on top of Jira."

"People really how easy it is to customize. In some previous tools, that has been very limited, or you had to know how to write code to do some of the customizations, or it was very confusing. Going back to the user interface, they've made the customization of the tool, the workspace settings, very easy for people to figure out and use."

"Octane creates a gentle approach to Agile-based projects."

"The ability to generate audit evidence with a single click saves ten days of work for ten people, enabling them to focus on other tasks."

"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."

"It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."

"A valuable feature is the pipeline, so that we can now connect to Jenkins and then have all the results from testing, from external, in the tool, so that we can see the whole approach from there. Also, We can work with labels so we have better filtering solutions than in ALM. And it's much smarter and leaner to use than ALM."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management pros

Cons

"They need to continue improving the interface with the third-party options."

"It would be great if they worked more closely with other solutions. There needs to be better integration with the platform for development purposes."

"We have some requests to beef up the manual testing abilities and the ability to report on testing progress. All the basics are there, but there's an issue of maintainability. For example... once you plan a test and it creates a run, more particularly a suite run, you can't edit the suite run afterward... That that is not realistic with how people work. Mistakes are made and people are humans and we change our minds about things. So the tool needs to allow for a bit more flexibility in that testing area, as well as some better widgets to report on progress."

"We've only had a few stability issues. Generally, we have issues following any deployment they do, so if they do a deployment on a Sunday, then we may have a couple of issues on a Monday or Tuesday."

"There is an opportunity for them to do a little more with the dashboarding. We still feel that HPE Quality Center/HPE ALM reporting is very powerful. We talked with R&D, and there are some things on their roadmap, but at the same time, their strategy is to connect Octane with visualization tools such as Power BI."

"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."

"Octane, from an administration perspective, is very limited. The application is improving with each release but what is missing is the ability to manage users and workspaces. I would also like "usable" reporting for more than a few workspaces. Also still missing is the ability to copy a workspace or get data in or out, except for limited REST calls."

"There are some challenges when we want to integrate the tool with other products, and it takes time for a team to figure out how to do it."

"The elements in filtering need to be improved, meaning the number of filters I can use in widgets or in the grid views in parallel. There's a limitation which bothers a lot of our users. Filtering in text, or having a complex filter is limited. In a given field, for example, I can use a filter only once. I cannot say, 'Include the values 1, 2, and 3, and exclude value 17.' This is not possible but we have requested it often."

"Documentation is not clear."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"It's pretty pricey, one of the most expensive ones on the market... The value depends on if you use all the features that it has. It comes with a lot of features. The difference between the license structure of ALM and Octane versus JIRA, is that you get everything with ALM and Octane... For JIRA, you buy the pieces one piece at a time."

"Pricing is the weakest point. It is expensive, but the tool has plenty of features. The main problem we have is that the pricing is very high compared to some other solutions."

"In terms of pricing, it's comparable to what we had previously. It's not priced at the higher end of the scale by any means. It's priced nicely, in the middle of the market. For what you're getting, it's a very good tool."

"The comparison is always with Jira, so the pricing of Octane is a bit on the higher side. But if you look at what you have to add to Jira, on the plug-in side, to have the same abilities you have with Octane, you're more or less even, or even ahead with Octane."

"The product is highly priced compared to other tools."

"It's expensive. HPE products, and now Micro Focus, have always been expensive. The license is not cheap, and it will always be a challenge, particularly for small organizations like ours."

"ALM Octane is very expensive."

"The tool's price is extremely high."

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

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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

Jama Connect vs Inflectra SpiraTeam

Compared 100% of the time

More Inflectra SpiraTeam Competitors

Jira vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 43% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 27% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 8% of the time

Rally Software vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 4% of the time

TFS vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Software Delivery Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

August 2025

Download Inflectra SpiraTeam product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Software Delivery Management

August 2025

OpenText Software Delivery Management report

Download OpenText Software Delivery Management product report

Also Known As

SpiraTeam

Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane

Overview

Need to manage your entire project lifecycle? From requirements and test cases, to tasks and code SpiraTeam has you covered. Powerful, straightforward, and flexible, SpiraTeam helps you get started fast. With SpiraTeam, manage your tasks and bugs quickly and easily, sync them with your team, and get back to developing. Integrated version control, testing (manual and automated), and customizable reporting, help you track it all.

Inflectra

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

Cenduit, Maas Database Applications, DHHS Tasmania, Rota Yokogawa, ASI Business Solutions, ComputaCenter

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

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra SpiraTeam vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management

July 2025

Free Report: Inflectra SpiraTeam vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management

Find out what your peers are saying about Inflectra SpiraTeam vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Inflectra SpiraTeam 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.