No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis Tosca 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:
 

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solution Architect 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.
reviewer2740515 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer 2 at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Automation test development becomes accessible and effective for functional testers
Tricentis Tosca is a codeless tool, making it easy for everyone to understand the transition of how to develop scenarios or test cases. In Tricentis Tosca, analyzing failures is straightforward because every time it fails somewhere, I get the screenshot, which helps me analyze how and why it failed. It has all the modules, including some pre-built ones that can be reused efficiently. Compared to other code tools such as Selenium, where I used to develop one script in one day, with Tricentis Tosca I can easily develop one script in four hours or three hours, saving four to five hours in a day.
JM
Director - Quality Engineering at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Integration with tool streamlines test management but needs better exporting options
I use it for test management within Jira This tool boasts an incredibly user-friendly interface that integrates seamlessly with other Jira tools. I particularly appreciate its intuitive features for designing test plans, creating test cases, and executing test cycles. Some areas for improvement,…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Micro Focus Quality Center helps in end-to-end traceability from releases to requirements to test cases and with defects."
"The integration with UFT is nice."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a very good test management tool especially for writing test cases and uploading. You can even upload the test cycles from Excel. You get the defects and the reports, and also some automation using EFT which works with ALM."
"For our clients it provides a centralized means of accessing data, monitoring progress, and creating a singular view on the test status within the business."
"From my perspective, it's a great tool, however, the world is now moving towards DevOps."
"The most valuable feature is the Quality Center itself; it's a test management tool, so it enables us to manage and track tests, record the effects, and give us full traceability throughout the testing process."
"Having used the tool before, I like the use of parameters, being able to do exports and reports of the data for monitoring of executions, and the defect management as well. I feel satisfaction in that area."
"What they do best is test management. That's their strong point."
"I like how the modules are set up, particularly how you can use the screens you're automating. This automation helps save both time and money because we use less test capacity regarding personnel."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is the Tosca Commander."
"It is easy to automate tasks, highly flexible, straightforward to learn, and easy to maintain."
"Tosca Continuous Integration allows you to test as soon as the code is deployed into the lower environment, giving the organization an edge by providing fast feedback in today’s fast-paced agile environment."
"Test case automation and ease of test case maintenance through Tosca has reduced the manpower needed for testing, reducing the time needed for testing, and has thus saved money."
"The solution is script-less, so you don't need IT knowledge to use the solution in an operational way. This is the most valuable feature. It's also only one of two or three tools that can do good automation on SAP, and in my opinion, it's the best of those."
"We decided to go with Testsuite because you can integrate manual test cases and you can see the reports in a nice way and see how the test case is going in the requirement section."
"The reporting is really nice."
"Now, we are getting consolidated reports in one place, we have all our metrics and repository together, and this is helpful."
"It has 90% of the basic features you need without having to pay a lot of extra money."
"At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements."
"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 a very intuitive user experience."
"It's very simple to use, which is beneficial, and it has 90% of the basic features you need without having to pay a lot of extra money."
"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 integration with test automation tools."
 

Cons

"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application."
"Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool."
"Performance issues are very common. The degradation of performance and consequent failures continuously happen."
"The reporting could be a little more robust."
"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."
"In future releases I'd like to see better reporting, a more simplified UI, and improved metrics."
"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."
"There are great features, however, transitioning between partners and managing a large number of test cases can be time-consuming."
"First, Tricentis could improve Tosca's Linux scripting. We can automate Linux scripting, but there are a few commands that Tosca doesn't support. DVS support and the object identification mechanism could also be better."
"The connection between the CI client and remote machine dropped off when certain standard Tosca modules were used in the test cases."
"I would like to see more implementation of AI on the self-healing aspect. That would be like the next step."
"The initial setup was complex."
"The Vision AI implementation works very slowly, affecting the speed of our work. The exploratory testing feature is not working for version 2023.1, which we are currently using."
"I would like to see more implementation of AI on the self-healing aspect."
"Parallel execution is not yet implemented for Tosca. This means you can't execute the same test case on multiple machines remotely."
"First, Tricentis could improve Tosca's Linux scripting. We can automate Linux scripting, but there are a few commands that Tosca doesn't support."
"For JIRA, in comparison to other solutions, such as TestRail, Zephyr is good, but it is not as good as DFS."
"The only thing I have missed is an easy way to configure showing the latest execution results of all test cases linked in JIRA (story/epic), thus, receiving the state of a feature."
"We are looking for advanced support with integration to CI tools. This is something which Zephyr does not have today."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"The solution is not really stable. Sometimes in the past, some pages wouldn't load due to issues."
"We faced some errors while uploading the test cases."
"We have a lot of automation for our products, and we require a utility for its integration with automation. Currently, we have to write this utility ourselves. It would be great if they can provide such a utility."
"Zephyr Enterprise needs to redesign the reporting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us."
"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 pricing is expensive nowadays."
"HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."
"Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."
"I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."
"It is expensive."
"Tricentis Tosca may be relatively on the higher side in terms of pricing, but their sales rep can give pretty decent deals when asked."
"Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost."
"Tricentis Tosca is not expensive at all."
"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."
"If you are purchasing less than five licenses, then the pricing is high. On a scale from one to ten, with one being low and ten being high pricing, I would rate this solution at eight."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive solution and there is an annual license required. The whole licensing process is confusing and it could be made easier."
"It costs a couple of thousand dollars for a little more than 125 users, per month."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
886,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Performing Arts
7%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise160
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise72
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...
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is...
What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?
For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.
What needs improvement with Zephyr Enterprise?
Some areas for improvement, include its export capabilities. Exporting test cases, especially those with screenshots ...
What advice do you have for others considering Zephyr Enterprise?
I would recommend it mainly for manual testing and test management. Within Zephyrscale, they also have automated test...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
Orchestrated Service Virtualization
SmartBear Zephyr
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Hyundai, Fujitsu, Google, David Jones, Burger King, Ingenico, Websense, Dow Jones, Harris, Saab
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, OpenText and others in Regression Testing Tools. Updated: March 2026.
886,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.