OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Polarion ALM comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Polarion ALM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Polarion ALM Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy.""What they do best is test management. That's their strong point.""It has a good response time.""Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side.""ALM is a well-known product and is one of the pioneers in providing test management facilities with a 360 degree view of requirements.""The stability is very good.""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.""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."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pros →

"The best feature of Polarion ALM to me is its traceability link.""The solution offers good integration.""The most valuable feature is the function of the ALM system.""It is a very stable solution.""We had a nice experience with technical support.""You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs.""The features I find the most valuable are requirement tracking and schematics.""Polarion ALM's integration is very good and easy to use."

More Polarion ALM Pros →

Cons
"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.""It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users.""Micro Focus is an expensive tool.""ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach.""There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed.""The QA needs improvement.""When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects.""I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Cons →

"The ease-of-use could be improved a little.""The most important thing for them to improve should be platform-independent features. They should also provide extensive pipelines and release pipelines that we can define and we can work on.""Based on my understanding, the tool's integration capabilities with multiple tools is an area of concern that Polarion needs to focus on more.""The weak point of Polarion ALM software is about reporting and time for extraction of the data...The quality of reporting needs to improve.""As Polarion ALM is a development-oriented tool, easy support or easy access is provided by default, but if I want to use detailed features, I need to write the script, particularly the VM script, and this is its area for improvement. I want Polarion ALM to have a graphical user interface that doesn't need scripting. In the next release of the tool, I'd like for it to not require scripting and programming because needing to run script language is time-consuming.""We use PTC Windchill, and Polarion ALM doesn't have native integration, so we had to purchase the connector to integrate it with Polarion ALM. We still haven't implemented it.""The solution's editing capabilities need improvement.""The planning and task management aspects of the solution were not that easy."

More Polarion ALM Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
  • "If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
  • "For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
  • "The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."
  • "HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
  • "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."
  • "Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
  • "I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
  • More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The license model is okay for large companies but would be quite expensive for smaller enterprises."
  • "If the pricing would come down and it was more affordable then we wouldn't have to switch."
  • "Our license for Polarion ALM is yearly. And it's not the cheapest tool that we've looked at. So if we had made our decision purely based on the licensing cost, we wouldn't have selected Polarion."
  • "The solution is expensive."
  • "Software for medical devices is always expensive."
  • "You have to pay around 50-60 euros per user."
  • "It is an expensive product."
  • More Polarion ALM Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:HP ALM and Jira can be easily integrated with the aid of a third-party Integration Solution To help you select the right integration approach and tool, you should first define your integration… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.
    Top Answer:It was expensive for us. For the first two weeks, we had to employ people now and then as the system needed to be more accurate. It cost us a lot of money. I rate the solution's pricing as a seven or… more »
    Top Answer:At the moment, I haven't looked in-depth into what needs improvement in the product. Based on my understanding, the tool's integration capabilities with multiple tools is an area of concern that… more »
    Top Answer:I work in an industry where I mainly look after the requirements, for which I use Polarion ALM.
    Ranking
    Views
    9,202
    Comparisons
    3,969
    Reviews
    17
    Average Words per Review
    424
    Rating
    7.4
    Views
    5,317
    Comparisons
    3,563
    Reviews
    10
    Average Words per Review
    412
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    Learn More
    Overview
    OpenText ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps you govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.

    The world’s first 100% browser-based ALM enterprise solution, which enables seamless collaboration across disparate teams, multi-directionally linked work items, full traceability, accelerated productivity and automated proof of compliance.

    Sample Customers
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    Engineering Ingegneria Informatica, IBS AG, Zumtobel Group
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Insurance Company9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization53%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Computer Software Company6%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    REVIEWERS
    Manufacturing Company31%
    Healthcare Company23%
    Transportation Company15%
    Consumer Goods Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Manufacturing Company23%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Financial Services Firm4%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise56%
    Large Enterprise37%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business33%
    Midsize Enterprise17%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Polarion ALM
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Polarion ALM and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Polarion ALM is ranked 7th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Polarion ALM is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion ALM writes "Though needing an improvement in reporting and time for extraction of the data, its integration capabilities are good". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Jama Connect, whereas Polarion ALM is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Codebeamer, PTC Integrity and TFS. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Polarion ALM 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.