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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs SmartBear TestComplete vs TestRail comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.8
Users acknowledge OpenText Application Quality Management's complexity but appreciate its efficiency, cost savings, improved traceability, and enhanced performance.
Sentiment score
6.8
SmartBear TestComplete automation saves time, enhances client satisfaction, and boosts efficiency, with annual savings of approximately $10,000.
Sentiment score
4.5
TestRail improved productivity, collaboration, and accuracy in test management, providing valuable reporting, integrations, and an intuitive interface for users.
It acts as an enabler for effective test and program management.
Once set up, only one person is needed to handle all tasks, reducing the requirement for multiple personnel.
Time-wise, it saves about fifteen to twenty percent compared to Excel, and money-wise, it's around ten percent.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Application Quality Management's service varies; some experience responsiveness and satisfaction, while others note delays and inconsistencies.
Sentiment score
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete's customer support is knowledgeable but inconsistent, with delays and unresolved issues needing faster escalation and responses.
Sentiment score
2.5
TestRail offers responsive support, but complex issues often require improved service, with users favoring self-service resources and community help.
Technical support has been excellent.
Quality is always high yet not perfect.
I am mostly happy with the technical support from OpenText ALM _ Quality Center.
I personally escalate Leapwork issues with the Leapwork support tech team, and they are very quick to solve problems.
Sometimes, you really need to speak to a person, and arranging such calls is not easy.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText Application Quality Management is scalable yet may face licensing and custom workflow challenges in large-scale deployments.
Sentiment score
7.4
SmartBear TestComplete is scalable and adaptable, with flexible scripting, but may require licensing for wider deployment.
Sentiment score
9.2
TestRail offers robust scalability and stability, handling varied team sizes effectively, though user monitoring improvements are noted.
OpenText ALM Quality Center is definitely scalable.
We achieved this scaling without any significant issues.
I have never experienced any issues with its scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText Application Quality Management is stable with minimal downtime; updates improve glitches, yet infrastructure occasionally impacts performance.
Sentiment score
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete generally stable, but users report crashes, memory leaks, and HTML5 testing delays in certain scenarios.
Sentiment score
5.3
TestRail is highly praised for its stability, with users experiencing rare, quickly resolved issues and consistently rating it highly.
From a stability standpoint, OpenText ALM Quality Center has been pretty good.
It has never had any issues.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Application Quality Management needs improved integration, UI, reporting, reduced cost, and enhanced usability for better performance and flexibility.
SmartBear TestComplete faces challenges in object recognition, integrations, licensing, performance, and support across browsers and mobile devices.
TestRail needs improvements in reporting, integration, user interface, defect management, API, technical support, pricing, and AI features.
Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.
I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the market.
The user-friendly nature could be enhanced as the interface isn’t intuitive.
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature.
TestRail lacks the functionality to map test cases to requirements and risks.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText Application Quality Management’s pricing is high, suited for large enterprises, with flexible options and economical cloud solutions available.
SmartBear TestComplete's pricing and licensing receive mixed reviews, seen as both reasonable and costly depending on usage and modules.
Enterprise users have mixed views on TestRail's pricing, appreciating discounts and scalability despite recurring costs and no perpetual license.
It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
It offers good value for money.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText ALM Quality Management offers robust reporting, flexible management, integrations, and real-time updates, enhancing efficiency and coordination.
SmartBear TestComplete excels in cross-platform automation, integration, and support for multiple languages, enhancing automated testing efficiency and maintenance.
TestRail offers intuitive test management, effective integrations, and user-friendly features for efficient, cost-effective test execution and organization.
The integration with internal applications and CollabNet is made possible through exposed APIs, allowing necessary integrations.
It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results.
We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered.
The most valuable feature of SmartBear TestComplete for me is the image comparison functionality.
The reporting capabilities and the simplicity of it make it user-friendly, as new users can easily understand the tool.
It significantly saves effort in managing test execution and managing all test cases.
 

Mindshare comparison

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Test Automation Tools
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.
StuartBarker - PeerSpot reviewer
A tool that provides effective test management and real-time reporting capabilities
I have faced some issues with the integration between TestRail and Jira where the status of tests is not displayed (in Jira) due to I suspect security settings on the browser. In a large corporate environment, it is not easily changed. The support wasn't particularly helpful. It would be great if I could create custom reports, ideally with a tool designed specifically for that.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Insurance Company
6%
 

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 in...
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 ...
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 ...
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to imp...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TestRail by Gurock?
Pricing is reasonable for TestRail. It offers good value for money.
What needs improvement with TestRail by Gurock?
In TestRail, there is significant difficulty with roles and rights. They are not in the mainstream. The person who ha...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
No data available
TestRail by Gurock
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Apple, Microsoft, Boeing, Intel, NASA, Amazon, HP, Samsung
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Siemens and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.