OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Zephyr Enterprise 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 Zephyr Enterprise 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. Zephyr Enterprise Report (Updated: March 2024).
763,955 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.""Easily integrates with Oracle e-Business Suite.""The product can scale.""I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project.""The most valuable Quality Center feature, I find, is the solution's integration with some of our automation tools. For us, the ability to capture and record and the ease of use from a user perspective, are all key.""So the first impression that hits me about HP UFT 14.0 (formerly QTP) is that it seems to be a whole lot faster! But that could be subjective, as I'm running it on a high end gaming system.""The stability is very good.""ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pros →

"It has 90% of the basic features you need without having to pay a lot of extra money.""It has integration with test automation tools.""If anyone is looking for a good, lightweight, flexible and agile test management product, I think they would do very well with Zephyr Enterprise.""The solution does its job well.""Zephyr Enterprise is a stable solution.""It has many features, but the main things that we need are the test cycles and integration with automation because we have automation for the web and mobile applications. We use it for test case management to run the test cases and get the results. At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements. We are able to get the test execution report and the test pass and fail report. This summary is delivered to our management.""We use the solution for test case management."

More Zephyr Enterprise Pros →

Cons
"We would like to have support for agile development.""ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach.""The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost.""Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time.""We are looking for more automation capabilities.""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.""Lacks sufficient plug-ins.""Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve how the automation process works. Addiotnlally, the parallel execution needs to be optimized. For example, if multiple users, which are two or more users, are doing an execution, while we execute the cases, I have seen some issues in the progress."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Cons →

"Zephyr Enterprise needs to redesign the reporting.""We would like support for the agile and behavior-driven development (BDD) approaches.""The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there.""We faced some errors while uploading the test cases.""Security needs improvement to protect customer information better.""Creating better default varieties of reporting would make the product much better and more popular.""The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there.""We have a lot of automation for our products, and we require a utility for its integration with automation. Currently, we have to write this utility ourselves. It would be great if they can provide such a utility."

More Zephyr Enterprise 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 →

  • "DFS is more expensive than Zephyr. DFS is around $32 per person, whereas Zephyr is $10 per person. There is a major difference in the price, which is the main reason why we are trying to shift to Zephyr."
  • "It costs a couple of thousand dollars for a little more than 125 users, per month."
  • More Zephyr Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    763,955 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:We faced some errors while uploading the test cases. The error was not clear. We did not know what the error was.
    Top Answer:We use the solution for test case management.
    Ranking
    1st
    Views
    3,859
    Comparisons
    1,683
    Reviews
    17
    Average Words per Review
    424
    Rating
    7.4
    4th
    Views
    3,394
    Comparisons
    1,741
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    187
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    SmartBear Zephyr
    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.

    Zephyr Enterprise is a robust enterprise test management platform that manages all aspects of the testing lifecycle. The solution is provided as an on-premise installation as well as a SaaS-based installation. Zephyr Enterprise enables you to make a rigid process flow flexible enough to accommodate changes. In addition, it provides all the functionality QA teams and testers need in order to create and execute test cases with less effort, allowing more time to do actual testing by alleviating significant time-wasting steps.

    Zephyr Enterprise Features

    Zephyr Enterprise has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

    • Visual dashboards
    • One-click integration
    • Multi Jira instance
    • Scalability
    • Third-Party Integrations
    • Reporting & Statistics
    • Data Import/Export
    • Data Visualization
    • User Management
    • Move & Copy
    • Software Testing Management
    • Requirements-Based Testing
    • Industry-strength scalability
    • Documented APIs
    • Regular maintenance and upgrades

    Zephyr Enterprise Benefits

    There are many benefits to implementing Zephyr Enterprise. Some of the biggest advantages the solution offers include:

    • Ready-to-use reports and customizable dashboards: With Zephyr Enterprise, reports and dashboards are updated in real time and you can share test results and link with your team in Jira to connect any known issues. In addition, the solution helps you increase workflow efficiency because it improves info sharing during standup meetings.
    • Supports bi-directional and multi-instance Jira integration: Not only does Zephyr Enterprise support bi-directional and multi-instance Jira integration, but it also gives you the ability to support multiple projects simultaneously – up to 200,000 test cases.
    • Global repository for test cases: Zephyr Enterprise helps you create, categorize, and store your test cases via a global repository that can be shared across your entire organization. You can also quickly reuse test cases using the structured folder management.
    • Test execution: Zephyr Enterprise makes it possible for you to execute tests step by step, manage pass/fail status, and launch automated execution, then file those defects into Jira. Zephyr Enterprise test executions allow teams to operate in a more efficient way.

    • Universal test automation: Zephyr Enterprise supports a wide range of automation frameworks, helping you decrease operational costs and increase test coverage.

      Reviews from Real Users

      Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by PeerSpot users currently using the Zephyr Enterprise solution.

      A Manager of Enterprise Applications at a retailer says what’s most valuable is that “It's very easy and simple to use, which is beneficial. It has 90% of the basic features you need without having to pay a lot of extra money.” He also adds, “Zephyr Enterprise is very stable and the initial setup is straightforward.”

      Jawaad A., Test Automation Lead at Trapeze, explains, "It has many features, but the main things that we need are the test cycles and integration with automation because we have automation for the web and mobile applications. We use it for test case management to run the test cases and get the results. At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements. We are able to get the test execution report and the test pass and fail report. This summary is delivered to our management."
    Sample Customers
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    Hyundai, Fujitsu, Google, David Jones, Burger King, Ingenico, Websense, Dow Jones, Harris, Saab
    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%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Government6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise56%
    Large Enterprise37%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise63%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise65%
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Zephyr Enterprise
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Zephyr Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    763,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 17 reviews while Zephyr Enterprise is ranked 4th in Test Management Tools with 3 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Zephyr Enterprise is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "It is a stable solution, and customer service is its most valuable feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zephyr Enterprise writes "Useful for test case management, but we faced some errors while uploading the test cases". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Zephyr Enterprise is most compared with TestRail, Tricentis Tosca, TFS, Tricentis qTest and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Zephyr Enterprise 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.