No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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

Interfacing Technologies En...
Ranking in Quality Management Software
48th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools (139th), Business Process Management (BPM) (60th), GRC (44th), Document Management Software (18th)
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Quality Management Software
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Quality Management Software category, the mindshare of Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is 1.2%. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 2.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Quality Management Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management2.8%
Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center1.2%
Other96.0%
Quality Management Software
 

Featured Reviews

SantoshKulkarni1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
A Robust Solution with Enhanced Automation and Process Improvement Identification Capabilities
I recommend that users invest more time in the initial setup of the process architecture within the tool. It is crucial to spend time designing how the process architecture works as it significantly impacts how the tool behaves. This upfront investment can prevent the need for extensive reworking later on.
GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One notable software-related benefit from a user perspective is our improved ability to identify opportunities for automation and process enhancement just by gaining a clearer view of the processes. There are two valuable aspects. First, setting up the process architecture is commendable. Second, not having to maintain different versions of processes is a notable benefit. The solution is stable. The support team is responsive."
"The most valuable feature is the integrated manner in which all the capabilities of the Enterprise Process Center platform work together and make it easier to complete the documentation of processes."
"Being able to manage tests as this is something very difficult to find in other products."
"Traceability of bugs to script execution (Test Lab) to Script (Test Plan) to Requirements, Easy to use."
"Traceability ability to reuse test cases reports."
"While comparing to the previous solution, this solution gave us as much as 60% cost savings."
"Quality Center is a very powerful tool."
"From my perspective, it's a great tool, however, the world is now moving towards DevOps."
"It has established a sense of accountability with its traceability mechanisms that are unparalleled from a single system."
"What they do best is test management. That's their strong point."
 

Cons

"However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights into process functionality. Additionally, there's always room for enhancement in the user interface."
"As with all such platforms, Enterprise Process Center is a complex tool and there are many capabilities and features that take time to learn."
"There were multiple modules and stuff to the solution so maybe the requirements can map to test scripts. It can't map to test steps. If you've got a process that's set up and you've got multiple test scripts that are in it, each script has to be linked to the requirement and the whole set can't be. If we're doing process-driven testing, it's more difficult to do it at the script level, which is what we're finding from a traceability perspective."
"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."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
"More flexible reporting would be good."
"The initial setup was not straightforward."
"Too many users logged in at a particular time affects the Quality Center response time dramatically."
"Release management and integration with other tools."
"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to understand what options you believe you are going to want to implement and rollout in the first three to five years, but spend the most time understanding what the set-up costs and pricing will be in the first two or maybe three."
"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
"The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable."
"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've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."
"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."
"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 less people were able to use it for their projects."
"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Quality Management Software solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
25%
Computer Software Company
20%
Healthcare Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlen...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
 

Also Known As

Enterprise Process Center
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Pepsi-Cola Manufacturing International Ltd., Pfizer Deutschland GmbH, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Bayer S.p.A., KPMG, Royal Australian Air, Orange
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.