Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText AccuRev vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

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 AccuRev
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
21st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText AccuRev is 0.9%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 4.6%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management4.6%
OpenText AccuRev0.9%
Other94.5%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

Sameh-Hablas - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO - Director General & Founder Ai/ IT Expert - Digital Transformation at Al Danah Information Systems Solutions
Helps us with our compliance goals, native quality management systems and with the legacy systems in our organization
To improve the product, it needs some enhancement to the application's interface to be more user-friendly. The product has all the features that we need and we can depend upon it. My issue with the product is that it is not easy to use without a guide or a proper manual. That is my point. It is not very friendly to use. For example, we may need the application to be more friendly in other sorts of ways. If we have an integrated module that allows access to the features we want through one click, you do not need to make it two or three clicks on the screen. The interface can be better designed to easily provide access to the features you need. The feature I would like to see in the next release is just for it to be more friendly to use and to be like a smart application that intuits your movement through the application. It needs to be something that works smoothly and intelligent without any complicated navigation of screens.
GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product has all the features that we for application managementat a lower cost."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is taking snapshots while doing the execution of the test cases."
"The solution is 100% scalable. It's much more scalable than the customer's capacity for implementing it. We do plan to increase usage ourselves."
"The most valuable feature is the Business Process Testing feature, BPT, because it brings in the most revenue."
"The most beneficial feature of test management in this solution is its ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously."
"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."
"We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered."
"Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well."
"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"
"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."
"It has a good response time."
"We were able to manage test cases effectively when we were using it. It worked well for us."
 

Cons

"In the next release, I would like to have a repository for the code which is embedded. Apart from that, it has everything I need."
"The pricing should be more competitive."
"It is difficult to gain experience with the product because resources and documentation for learning are not available."
"What I'm missing from the solution is a repository for the code. Something like Git, for example. Some sort of depository for the code that is embedded."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"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."
"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."
"I would rate it a 10 if it had the template functionality on the web side, had better interfaces between other applications, so that we didn't have dual data entry or have to set up our own migrations."
"Currently, what's missing in the solution is the ability for users to see the ongoing scenarios and the status of those scenarios versus the requirements. As for the management tools, they also need to be improved so users can have a better idea of what's going on in just one look, so they can manage testing activities better."
"Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue."
"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."
"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a lower cost than other top competetors."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."
"Pricing could be improved as it's high-priced. I don't exactly know the pricing point, but previously, I know that it was really high so less people were able to use it for their projects."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market."
"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 pricing is expensive nowadays."
"I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Performing Arts
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise162
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
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 bottlen...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus AccuRev, AccuRev
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Akcelerant, SDL, CSG, Avid Technology Inc., Azimuth Systems Inc, Drivecam, Endgame, f5 Networks, Follett Software, Hyland Software, Indanet, Kronos, McAfee
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText AccuRev vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.