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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs SmartBear TestComplete vs Zephyr Enterprise 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management5.0%
Jira17.7%
Microsoft Azure DevOps13.0%
Other64.3%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Test Automation Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.9%
Tricentis Tosca20.8%
OpenText Functional Testing8.9%
Other64.4%
Test Automation Tools
Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Zephyr Enterprise7.2%
Tricentis qTest14.6%
OpenText Application Quality Management12.7%
Other65.5%
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.
PraveenKumar27 - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful for test case management, but we faced some errors while uploading the test cases
We have used the product well. We use it for test case uploading. We created an Excel file and aligned the columns of the Excel file with the columns on the solution. It was a minimum guidance process. We can meet our requirements using the solution. We are able to do tasks without many errors. Overall, I rate the product a six or seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"The integration with UFT is nice."
"It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched."
"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."
"The most beneficial feature of test management in this solution is its ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously."
"Defect management is very good."
"You can do your development from start to finish: starting with the requirements, ending with defects, and testing in-between."
"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."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"If anyone is looking for a good, lightweight, flexible and agile test management product, I think they would do very well with Zephyr Enterprise."
"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."
"It has a very intuitive user experience."
"We use the solution for test case management."
"The solution does its job well."
"Zephyr Enterprise is a stable solution."
"It has a very intuitive user experience."
 

Cons

"There were multiple modules and stuff to the solution so maybe the requirements can map to test scripts. It can't map to test steps. If you've got a process that's set up and you've got multiple test scripts that are in it, each script has to be linked to the requirement and the whole set can't be. If we're doing process-driven testing, it's more difficult to do it at the script level, which is what we're finding from a traceability perspective."
"There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"The solution is not browser-based, which modern users prefer."
"The technology used for UI and UX are not user-friendly."
"I'd like to be able to improve how our QA department uses the tool, by getting better educational resources, documentation to help with competencies for my testers."
"At times, identifying or locating an element can be somewhat challenging. However, in a recent test update, they introduced Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capability. This introduction has reduced the challenges to some extent, as we can now utilize OCR if the normal method doesn't work. Nevertheless, there is still significant potential for improvement in TestComplete's ability to identify various object elements. I don't have any specific concerns to mention. I have observed significant improvements in TestComplete over the past few years, especially in its support for highly dynamic object elements used in products like Salesforce Dynamics 365. In earlier versions, there were numerous challenges, but the current version is far superior to its predecessors."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"The integration tools could be better."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"Occasionally, image comparison results in failures, possibly due to issues with resolution or font size on the server side, which can be challenging to identify."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"Zephyr Enterprise needs to redesign the reporting."
"We would like support for the agile and behavior-driven development (BDD) approaches."
"We faced some errors while uploading the test cases."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"Creating better default varieties of reporting would make the product much better and more popular."
"The solution is not really stable. Sometimes in the past, some pages wouldn't load due to issues."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"It's difficult to export the test cases in Zephyr, especially with screenshots or attachments, making sharing test cases not very easy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is expensive nowadays."
"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market."
"The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable."
"It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"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."
"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."
"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
868,288 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise32
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

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 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 track...
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 needs improvement with Zephyr Enterprise?
Some areas for improvement, include its export capabilities. Exporting test cases, especially those with screenshots ...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
No data available
SmartBear Zephyr
 

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.
Hyundai, Fujitsu, Google, David Jones, Burger King, Ingenico, Websense, Dow Jones, Harris, Saab
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Siemens and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: September 2025.
868,288 professionals have used our research since 2012.