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."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."
"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."
"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."
"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 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.
