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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs QMetry Test Management 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 Test Management Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd)
QMetry Test Management
Ranking in Test Management Tools
16th
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 12.6%, up from 12.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QMetry Test Management is 2.0%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Huong Vuong - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective testing and good data management with seamless Excel integration
There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements. For example, only the first user can click 'run' during testing, and subsequent users have to click 'continue manual run', which can create reporting errors. Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.
VinayKumar17 - PeerSpot reviewer
Helped with agile testing, provides exploratory testing and screen capture capabilities but visibility of test cases could be improved
QMetry has different aspects. It provides exploratory testing and screen capture capabilities while running tests. It has a recorder integrated. If you run a test on an application, it will record every aspect of it. For example, if you execute a user scenario, it will record what the user does within the application and generate a script. This can also be used for quick automation. Moreover, if we have an automation framework, QMetry can integrate with it. QMetry can also handle load testing in web-based applications. We have integrated it with a bug-tracking system, but not for automation. It was not difficult to integrate it. This integration was mainly for reporting purposes, such as creating reports directly from QMetry.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"From reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is its support for many automation technologies."
"The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable."
"It is stable and reliable."
"Easily integrates with Oracle e-Business Suite."
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"The best benefit was for new hires. We used to write our test cases in simple English within QMetry, so anyone who knew English could understand them. This helped with training new hires."
 

Cons

"The technology used for UI and UX are not user-friendly."
"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."
"There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements."
"There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed."
"We operate in Sweden, and there are not so many Swedish people that know the product."
"Recently, I faced some issues while using the product on Mac-based machines, as I was unable to upload test cases."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
"For me, the visibility could be improved. When executing a test case, you needed to open it separately to read the steps."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"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."
"QMetry was cheaper than Xray, which was based on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
61%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for QMetry Test Management?
QMetry was cheaper than Xray, which was based on the number of users. It was around $10d per user, while QMetry was closer to $4 per user. So it's about half the price.
What needs improvement with QMetry Test Management?
QMetry team upgrade features based on the number of users experiencing certain problems. If fewer users encounter an issue, they may not address it. They have a different concept where feature deve...
What is your primary use case for QMetry Test Management?
We use it for test case management. We used it to define valid and invalid inputs and to create tests for both scenarios. This involved manual testing, such as boundary value analysis and exceeding...
 

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)
Healthland, Stanford University, Solid Fire, Proteus, Epocrates, Cognifide, Exo, Holmes Corporation, Global Communication, University of Sydney
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: June 2025.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.