OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs TestRail comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OpenText Logo
3,737 views|1,601 comparisons
90% willing to recommend
IDERA Logo
3,564 views|1,637 comparisons
90% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

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

Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools 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. TestRail Report (Updated: March 2024).
767,667 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
"I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent.""ALM is a well-known product and is one of the pioneers in providing test management facilities with a 360 degree view of requirements.""It has a good response time.""The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is the alignment of the test to the execution and the linking of the defects to the two. It automatically links any issues you have to the test.""Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs""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.""It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched.""It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pros →

"The ability to time test runs gives the tester the ability to compare calculated times to actual times it takes for a test case to run.""The solution is very stable. We've never had any issues with it.""The API to support integration of the homemade automated testing tool.""The features that I have found most valuable are that there are various test case templates and test artifact maintenance.""Integration with Confluence and JIRA.""You don't need to follow complex procedures to create a test run, test case, etc.""I use the product to create test cases and share them with my team and manager.""The most valuable features are the reporting in the dashboard and the general way in which we can create test runs is helpful."

More TestRail Pros →

Cons
"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus.""The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology.""The uploading of test scripts can get a little cumbersome and that is a very sensitive task. They could improve on that a lot. It's really important that this gets better as I'm loading close to a thousand test scripts per cycle.""The QA needs improvement.""Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports.""One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers.""The UI is very dated. Most applications these days have a light UI that can be accessed by pretty much any browser; QC still uses a UI which has a look almost the same for the past 20 years.""The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Cons →

"I have faced some issues with the integration between TestRail and Jira, which haven't been permanently resolved yet.""There are a number of improvements that have been requested. While I don't have a list of these requests available, many can be found on Gurock's forum.""It would be useful if it had its own issue management system. At the moment, it's purely a test management tool and you have to link to a defect management tool, like JIRA. It would be useful if there was an option to use its own defect management tool so that it's integrated and not two separate tools.""Better prediction of text.""It would be nice to have a description section when creating the test scenario itself so I can indicate what the configuration should be.""With TestRail, the APIs are there, but they may not be able to easily integrate with the Jenkins.""The reports should be more user-friendly.""This solution has room for improvement. For example, some particular projects need to adjust access or add additional members and this isn't always possible. Role-based access would improve this."

More TestRail 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 →

  • "Use TestRail Cloud (online TR hosted server) and don't worry about maintenance or scalability. It saves a lot of cash and time."
  • "My advice to others is to shop around for the best deal. Some options out there are free in cyberspace."
  • "Pricing for small teams seems correct with respect to competitors."
  • "Negotiate the best deal you can."
  • "Its price is definitely not more. If they introduce automation, they can charge more."
  • "The price of the solution is based on how many users you have per year. When you grow, it is segmented, For example, 10 to 25, you have a price, and more than 50, or 100, you need to take the enterprise license. I don't think we will reach this point."
  • "I give the price a five out of ten."
  • "The product is not much expensive."
  • More TestRail Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    767,667 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:I use the solution for test management.
    Top Answer:The product has a reasonable price in terms of the features.
    Ranking
    1st
    Views
    3,737
    Comparisons
    1,601
    Reviews
    16
    Average Words per Review
    429
    Rating
    7.4
    3rd
    Views
    3,564
    Comparisons
    1,637
    Reviews
    8
    Average Words per Review
    309
    Rating
    8.4
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    TestRail by Gurock
    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.

    TestRail helps you manage and track your software testing efforts and organize your QA department. Its intuitive web-based user interface makes it easy to create test cases, manage test runs and coordinate your entire testing process.

    Easily track and follow the status of individual tests, milestones and projects with dashboards and activity reports. Get real-time insights into your testing progress and boost productivity with personalized todo lists, filters and email notifications. Efficient test management, get started today!

    Sample Customers
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    Apple, Microsoft, Boeing, Intel, NASA, Amazon, HP, Samsung
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Insurance Company9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization54%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Computer Software Company5%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company50%
    Recruiting/Hr Firm13%
    University13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company23%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Healthcare Company7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise57%
    Large Enterprise36%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business61%
    Midsize Enterprise17%
    Large Enterprise22%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business29%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise56%
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. TestRail
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. TestRail and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews while TestRail is ranked 3rd in Test Management Tools with 21 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while TestRail is rated 8.0. 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 TestRail writes "A tool that provides effective test management and real-time reporting capabilities". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Polarion ALM, whereas TestRail is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, TFS, Tricentis qTest, Tricentis Tosca and QMetry Test Management. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. TestRail report.

    See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Test Management 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.