OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis qTest comparison

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Tricentis qTest

Download the complete report

Helped 861,170 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Application Qualit...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (4th)

Tricentis qTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 12.3%, up from 12.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 15.2%, up from 11.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer at Vodafone

Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities

Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

Read full review

SamuLehikoinen

Partner Manager at Agiilit Oy

Efficient and collaborative software testing providing comprehensive test management capabilities, seamless integration with various tools and impressive manual regression testing features

The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall experience with the tool was positive. When you begin integrating your testing tools with qTest, the available examples may not be very clear, and I believe this is an area that could be enhanced, particularly in terms of providing clearer integration guidance. While the tool's integration with various testing tools is impressive, there is room for improvement in showcasing more cases and benefits, especially through additional videos and documentation.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."

"We were able to manage test cases effectively when we were using it. It worked well for us."

"The solution's support team was always there to help."

"We are able to use Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for test management, defect management, test process, test governance activities, and requirement management. We are able to achieve all of this, the solution is very useful."

"As a system administrator, HPE ALM can be flexibly configured so that it can accommodate a variety of defined project lifecycles and test methodologies."

"The integration with UFT is nice."

"We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered."

"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 Application Quality Management pros

"The initial setup was very easy."

"The test automation tracking is valuable because our automated testing systems are distributed and they did not necessarily have a single point where they would come together and be reported. Having all of them report back to qTest, and having one central place where all of my test executions are tracked and reported on, is incredibly valuable because it saves time."

"I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests."

"qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location."

"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."

"What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature."

"The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."

"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"The performance could be faster."

"Client-side ActiveX with patch upgrades"

"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"

"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."

"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."

"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."

"The solution is not browser-based, which modern users prefer."

"The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order."

"We feel the integration between JIRA and qTest could be done even better. It's not as user-friendly as qTest's other features. The JIRA integration with qTest needs to mature a lot... We need smarter execution with JIRA in the case of failures, so that the way we pull out the issues again for the next round is easy... Locating JIRA defects corresponding to a trait from the test results is something of a challenge."

"The Insights reporting engine has a good test-metrics tracking dashboard. The overall intent is good... But the execution is a little bit limited... the results are not consistent. The basic premise and functionality work fine... It is a little clunky with some of the advanced metrics. Some of the colorings are a little unique."

"We faced challenges when trying to consolidate data in a repository, and similar features were lacking in qTest. It also does not allow for task tracking or calculating time spent on tasks, which affects project timelines."

"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."

"I wouldn't say a lot of good things about Insights, but that's primarily because, with so many test cases, it is incredibly slow for us. We generally don't use it because of that."

"I really can't stand the Defects module. It's not easy to use. ALM's... Defects Module is really robust. You can actually walk through each defect by just clicking an arrow... But with the qTest Defects module you can't do that. You have to run a query. You're pretty much just querying a database. It's not really a module, or at least a robust module. Everything is very manual."

"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."

More Tricentis qTest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us."

"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)."

"I feel that the licenses are expensive. "

"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."

"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."

"It has several limitations in adapting its agility easily."

"The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable."

"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."

"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."

"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."

"We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."

"For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."

"We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."

More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

861,170 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

37%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

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.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.

What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

We work with Jira now, and there are some very good workflows. There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval. I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the mar...

What do you like most about Tricentis qTest?

I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?

Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray.

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

Tricentis qTest needs improvement in its repositories' functionality. Unlike Azure, it does not have repositories to upload scripts. Additionally, it lacks features like task addition and tracking ...

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Comparisons

Compared 19% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 17% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 13% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

Rally Software vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 32% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 13% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 7% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

TFS vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 4% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

OpenText Application Quality Management

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Tricentis qTest

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM

qTest

Overview

OpenText Application Quality Management offers extensive capabilities in test management, automation tool integration, and defect traceability, providing an efficient and user-friendly experience for tracking and managing testing workflows.

The platform supports test management by integrating with automation tools and managing the traceability of defects and requirements. It facilitates users with linking test cases to defects, uploading from Excel, and generating customizable reports, which enhances efficiency. Business Process Testing and requirement capturing for test cases further extend its capabilities. Users report concerns about its integration with other tools, particularly in DevOps and agile frameworks, as well as challenges with its complex interface and high cost. Improved integration, better browser compatibility, upgraded dashboards, and enhanced support for agile methodologies are recommended by many users.

What are the most important features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Integration with Automation Tools: Facilitates seamless testing through integration.
Test Management: Centralized management of test scenarios and cycles.
Defect Traceability: Links defects with test cases for comprehensive tracking.
Excel Uploads: Allows users to import data directly from spreadsheets.
Customizable Reports: Offers tailored reporting capabilities to suit user needs.
Business Process Testing: Supports streamlined testing of business processes.
Requirement Capturing: Efficiently captures and maps test case requirements.

What benefits or ROI can users expect?

Efficiency: Increases speed and accuracy in managing test processes.
Comprehensive Tracking: Provides a thorough view of test and defect linkages.
User-Friendly Interface: Enhances ease of use and reduces complexity.
Improved Testing Accuracy: Facilitates better detection and management of defects.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances functionality with investment value.

In industries such as finance, healthcare, and technology, organizations apply OpenText Application Quality Management for test management, planning, and automation. It is an essential tool for managing test scenarios, recording results, and supporting both manual and automated testing processes. This tool aids in regression testing, ensuring requirement traceability and acting as a repository for executing test cycles, thereby supporting robust quality assurance practices.

OpenText

Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Tricentis qTest