We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM Octane and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Agile Planning Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its end-to-end traceability is one of the big advantages. Most of our agile projects work in a closed team structure. We are seeing what is the flow, where we are, and what is the project milestone. So, it provides end-to-end traceability and good visibility of project milestones."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ability to manage test scenarios, test results, and test automation, which are its primary functionalities."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Backlog management is the most valuable feature. This was a capability that was missing or difficult to achieve in ALM Quality Center."
"The feature I found most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its ability to integrate with the CI/CD stack."
"Octane works well with the Jira portfolio to track the project with two methods: Agile and Waterfall. We can track all the testing in Waterfall or Agile and synchronize it with Agile tools."
"It’s easy to set up."
"Current version of the solution is fairly stable."
"As a product, the primary reason we like it is it gets integrated with our ITSM solution so that we don't have to go for an external product for project management like Jira."
"The program is stable."
"You don't need a lot of plugins."
"The product is quite convenient and user-friendly."
"The resource manager is useful."
"The solution is scalable."
"Everything is valuable. It is tough to choose a particular feature, but project portfolio management along with agile 2.0 are two key product features that I would suggest for services companies like us."
"The most valuable feature of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is incident management."
"The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The biggest problem with ALM Octane is that it's very complex, so it's difficult to use and scale."
"The limitation of Octane is that we can't do a release outside of the sprint. We can only plan the release in the sprint. With Agile and JIRA tools, we can plan the release outside the sprint and do a global release of all the projects from the sprint."
"I have yet to experience the CI/CD part of Micro Focus ALM Octane but as demonstrated by the team who is providing the services, I see that the CI/CD could improve. When we check in the code, for the code snippet that has been checked in by a particular user, you need to open a separate file. When comparing Micro Focus ALM Octane to Jira, they have a separate window in which you can click on the ID and the code is visible in the snippet. It's a two-step process in Micro Focus ALM Octane and it's a single-step process in Jira. It's essential for the developers to think about this difference."
"Improvements could be made by way of additional integrations across the lifecycle."
"The solution needs a few things in terms of resource management."
"The interface isn't user-friendly."
"The setup is a bit complex. It depends on the organizational needs, and sometimes, we make customizations based on those needs."
"I would like to see some artificial intelligence incorporated into the management functions."
"The price is too high."
"The cost could be improved. The solution is quite pricey."
"The configurations are fine, but the user interface could be improved."
"Dashboard interface is limited functionally and not very user friendly"
More ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 7th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 38 reviews while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is ranked 5th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 27 reviews. OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2, while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management writes "A very strategic demand management tool that visualizes risks and ratings in a bubble chart". OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and TFS, whereas ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Jira Align, Microsoft Project Server and Smartsheet. See our OpenText ALM Octane vs. ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management report.
See our list of best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Agile Planning 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.
