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."The solution's support team was always there to help."
"Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs"
"You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this. It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product."
"The stability is very good."
"The integration with UFT is nice."
"The AI and functionality interface are useful."
"Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."
"The most valuable user feature that we use right now is the camera."
"The most valuable features of TestRail by Gurock are the user experience, it's very easy to learn. There is no learning curve needed to work on projects and manage the test cases, it is easy. Exporting and importing are simple."
"The solution is very stable. We've never had any issues with it."
"Reliable and stable. It is important that TestRail be up and running 24/7 as we have users around the world using it."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility, ease of use for writing new test cases, the test plans, and the composition."
"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."
"This is a user friendly solution."
"Most valuable features are the ease of organizing test cases and a great API for sending results from automated test run results into the database."
"I use the product to create test cases and share them with my team and manager."
"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."
"The performance could be faster."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should improve the reports. Reporting on tax execution progress against the plan. However, they might have improved over two years since I have used the solution."
"I'd like to be able to improve how our QA department uses the tool, by getting better educational resources, documentation to help with competencies for my testers."
"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."
"The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac."
"I'm looking at more towards something more from a DevOps perspective. For example, how to pull the DevOps ecosystem into the Micro Focus ALM."
"It would be nice to have a description section when creating the test scenario itself so I can indicate what the configuration should be."
"The test suite management has room for improvement as well as better reporting."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I have faced some issues with the integration between TestRail and Jira, which haven't been permanently resolved yet."
"It would be nice if they would add an export to Word."
"Reporting could be more flexible regarding repeating reports."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
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.
