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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Polarion ALM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 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 Application Qualit...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (1st)
Polarion ALM
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 5.4%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion ALM is 8.3%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

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.
Dina Bindi - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides traceability and compliance with high flexibility
It's extremely flexible. Configuring items is straightforward and doesn't require involving the supplier each time. We find the requirement management, test management, documentation, and dashboards very effective. However, we don't use DevOps-related features, such as integration with tools like SVN or Git, because we use Azure DevOps. The aspects related to requirements, testing, changes, tasks, and agile methodology are excellent, which is why we've been using it for a long time.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"Integration with other HPE products."
"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."
"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."
"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."
"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."
"Polarion ALM has some valuable tools for managing our targets and requirements. I think that's its best feature."
"It is a very stable solution."
"The best feature of Polarion ALM to me is its traceability link."
"You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs."
"It offers good performance."
"Polarion ALM delivers both document views and table views simultaneously and organizes configurations according to norms and standards."
"I am impressed with the solution’s stability."
"The most valuable feature is the function of the ALM system."
 

Cons

"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"
"There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements."
"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system."
"The UFT tests don't work very well and it seems to depend on things as simple as the screen resolution on a machine that I've moved to."
"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."
"We would like to have support for agile development."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"Return on investment isn't something I often contemplate. I have not seen many business cases around it."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and a server-based application rather than client based."
"The user interface of Polarion ALM needs improvement as it can experience changes that disrupt workflows, especially during major updates."
"We use PTC Windchill, and Polarion ALM doesn't have native integration, so we had to purchase the connector to integrate it with Polarion ALM. We still haven't implemented it."
"Based on my understanding, the tool's integration capabilities with multiple tools is an area of concern that Polarion needs to focus on more."
"The solution's editing capabilities need improvement."
"The tool needs to improve its planning. It also needs to add more integrations."
"The solution needs to improve its user experience and graphics."
"The most important thing for them to improve should be platform-independent features. They should also provide extensive pipelines and release pipelines that we can define and we can work on."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."
"The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"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)."
"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
"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."
"Software for medical devices is always expensive."
"You have to pay around 50-60 euros per user."
"Our license for Polarion ALM is yearly. And it's not the cheapest tool that we've looked at. So if we had made our decision purely based on the licensing cost, we wouldn't have selected Polarion."
"The solution is expensive."
"If the pricing would come down and it was more affordable then we wouldn't have to switch."
"The license model is okay for large companies but would be quite expensive for smaller enterprises."
"It is an expensive product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
28%
Computer Software Company
12%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
4%
 

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?
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 needs improvement with Polarion ALM?
The backlog management for Agile in Polarion ALM could be improved or enhanced in future releases. What is missing is that if you have a hierarchy in your backlog with epics, features, and user sto...
What is your primary use case for Polarion ALM?
We are in our product development using Polarion ALM's functionalities. I am a power user, partly responsible for configuring the tool. We are using it for many things. The idea was to go for a req...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Engineering Ingegneria Informatica, IBS AG, Zumtobel Group
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.