OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis qTest comparison

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Tricentis qTest

Download the complete report

Helped 864,574 peers since 2012

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

208

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (5th)

Tricentis qTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

3rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 12.5%, up from 12.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 15.1%, up from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer at Vodafone

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.

Read full review

SamuLehikoinen

Partner Manager at Agiilit Oy

Efficient and collaborative software testing providing comprehensive test management capabilities, seamless integration with various tools and impressive manual regression testing features

The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall experience with the tool was positive. When you begin integrating your testing tools with qTest, the available examples may not be very clear, and I believe this is an area that could be enhanced, particularly in terms of providing clearer integration guidance. While the tool's integration with various testing tools is impressive, there is room for improvement in showcasing more cases and benefits, especially through additional videos and documentation.

Read full review

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 feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is its support for many automation technologies."

"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."

"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."

"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."

"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."

"You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this. It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product."

"The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs."

"The stability is very good."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"Being able to log into Defects, go right into JIRA, add that defect to the user story, right there at that point, means we connect all of that. That is functionality we haven't had in the past. As a communication hub, it works really well. It's pretty much a closed loop; it's all contained right there. There's no delay. You're getting from the defect to the system to JIRA to the developer."

"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."

"The main thing that really stuck out when we started using this tool, is the linkability of qTest to JIRA, and the traceability of tying JIRA requirement and defects directly with qTest. So when you're executing test cases, if you go to fail it, it automatically links and opens up a JIRA window. You're able to actually write up a ticket and it automatically ties it to the test case itself."

"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."

"qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location."

"I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests."

"The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."

"The test automation tracking is valuable because our automated testing systems are distributed and they did not necessarily have a single point where they would come together and be reported. Having all of them report back to qTest, and having one central place where all of my test executions are tracked and reported on, is incredibly valuable because it saves time."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. E.g., they have always stated that, "You can monitor and create requirements," but it has its limitations. That's why companies will choose another requirements management solution and import data from that source system into Quality Center. Micro Focus has also invested in an adapter between Dimensions RM and ALM via Micro Focus Connect. However, I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool. I feel what Micro Focus did is say, "Our strategy is not to improve these parts within the tool itself, but search for supported integrations within our own tool set." This has not been helpful."

"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."

"There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements."

"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."

"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."

"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."

"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."

"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"As an admin, I'm unable to delete users. I'm only able to make a user inactive. This is a scenario about which I've already made a suggestion to qTest. When people leave the company, I should be able to delete them from qTest. I shouldn't have to have so many users."

"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."

"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."

"I wouldn't say a lot of good things about Insights, but that's primarily because, with so many test cases, it is incredibly slow for us. We generally don't use it because of that."

"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."

"I would really love to find a way to get the results, into qTest Manager, of Jenkins' executing my Selenium scripts, so that when I look at everything I can look at the whole rather than the parts. Right now, I can only see what happens manually. Automation-wise, we track it in bulk, as opposed to the discrete test cases that are performed. So that connection point would be really interesting for me."

"The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented."

"For UFT to Tosca migration, scripts need to be rewritten as there are no automatic converters available."

More Tricentis qTest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"I feel that the licenses are expensive. "

"The solution is priceed high."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."

"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."

"This is an expensive solution."

"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."

"It has several limitations in adapting its agility easily."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

"We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."

"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."

"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."

"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."

"For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."

"We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."

More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

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

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

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?

What do you like most about Tricentis qTest?

I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?

Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray.

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

Tricentis qTest needs improvement in its repositories' functionality. Unlike Azure, it does not have repositories to upload scripts. Additionally, it lacks features like task addition and tracking ...

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Comparisons

Compared 19% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 16% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 33% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 14% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 8% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

TFS vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 4% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

OpenText Application Quality Management

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Tricentis qTest

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM

qTest

Overview

OpenText Application Quality Management offers extensive capabilities in test management, automation tool integration, and defect traceability, providing an efficient and user-friendly experience for tracking and managing testing workflows.

The platform supports test management by integrating with automation tools and managing the traceability of defects and requirements. It facilitates users with linking test cases to defects, uploading from Excel, and generating customizable reports, which enhances efficiency. Business Process Testing and requirement capturing for test cases further extend its capabilities. Users report concerns about its integration with other tools, particularly in DevOps and agile frameworks, as well as challenges with its complex interface and high cost. Improved integration, better browser compatibility, upgraded dashboards, and enhanced support for agile methodologies are recommended by many users.

What are the most important features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Integration with Automation Tools: Facilitates seamless testing through integration.
Test Management: Centralized management of test scenarios and cycles.
Defect Traceability: Links defects with test cases for comprehensive tracking.
Excel Uploads: Allows users to import data directly from spreadsheets.
Customizable Reports: Offers tailored reporting capabilities to suit user needs.
Business Process Testing: Supports streamlined testing of business processes.
Requirement Capturing: Efficiently captures and maps test case requirements.

What benefits or ROI can users expect?

Efficiency: Increases speed and accuracy in managing test processes.
Comprehensive Tracking: Provides a thorough view of test and defect linkages.
User-Friendly Interface: Enhances ease of use and reduces complexity.
Improved Testing Accuracy: Facilitates better detection and management of defects.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances functionality with investment value.

In industries such as finance, healthcare, and technology, organizations apply OpenText Application Quality Management for test management, planning, and automation. It is an essential tool for managing test scenarios, recording results, and supporting both manual and automated testing processes. This tool aids in regression testing, ensuring requirement traceability and acting as a repository for executing test cycles, thereby supporting robust quality assurance practices.

OpenText

Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Tricentis qTest