We performed a comparison between Inflectra SpiraTest and Polarion Requirements based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The reporting functionality helps vendors and technical resources identify bugs and issues that need to be addressed. The simple dashboard-style home page makes training end-user testers simple and straightforward. The actual testing UI is VERY straightforward and very intuitive for the end-users that test the system since very often we pull from business and operational users to help test new systems."
"I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it."
"We were able to add a step-by-step procedure for someone to follow to assist in testing."
"The user-friendly features are the most valuable. For example, migration of requirements and migration of test cases and the creation of traceability. You have various reports that you need. The plug-ins that are available to connect with the other tools."
"The features of this product most valuable to me were the test case management and the visual status, by which it was displayed."
"The ability to reuse test cases already used across projects is the most valuable feature of this solution. We don't need to create new ones."
"Inflectra SpiraTest has a lot of functionality, which is good."
"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."
"A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization."
"I like the way this solution is structured."
"We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for automotive industries. There is an open API for integration with Jira as well, so for me, customization is a strong point."
"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."
"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."
"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."
"My company mainly utilizes the product for documenting internal standards, guidelines, and requirements. Currently, we're focusing on using it for internal purposes, but the vision is to expand its usage to include contract requirements and tracking functionalities. While we're not there yet, it has proven effective for managing our internal documentation needs."
"The user interface is slightly complicated and not very consistent. It could be more user friendly."
"Migrating is not very easy. It depends on the organization, how efficient and effective the decision-making process is. The plug-ins should be easier and more integrated rather than the user trying to integrate the tools which are more popular, like Jira et al."
"The folder organization in Inflectra SpiraTest could be better, though I cannot comment whether that is structure-related. Most of what I need would probably be in the tool, but as a test manager, I need to be able to create dashboards and reports easily."
"Being able to add scripting for testing can and does save a lot of time. When you are able to just ‘run’ a test case rather than manually add it and run it."
"Two areas that can stand improvement: integration with third party products and making it more intuitive."
"It should develop integration with JIRA. We have some complexities which caused us not to decide to integrate it with our JIRA, like synchronous data."
"The UI for managing test cases, test sets, test runs could be a little more integrated, currently, these feel disjointed at times and confusing. Also, the test steps page needs to display the test steps closer to the top of the UI so as to not have to scroll down to find."
"Polarion Requirement needs to have a feature where we can track changes and compare documents. Currently, we do it manually."
"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."
"The usability of the solution should also be improved."
"If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable."
"It is stable enough but if you would like to work with more requirement objects, then you will get timeouts."
"Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature."
"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear."
"The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management."
Inflectra SpiraTest is ranked 9th in Application Requirements Management with 25 reviews while Polarion Requirements is ranked 3rd in Application Requirements Management with 12 reviews. Inflectra SpiraTest is rated 7.4, while Polarion Requirements is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Inflectra SpiraTest writes "Intuitive enough and easy to learn, but in terms of folder organization, it could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion Requirements writes "Defines, builds, tests and manages complex software systems". Inflectra SpiraTest is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS and Jama Connect, whereas Polarion Requirements is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jama Connect, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Helix ALM. See our Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Polarion Requirements report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.
