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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Zephyr Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st)
Zephyr Enterprise
Ranking in Test Management Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.4%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zephyr Enterprise is 5.2%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
Zephyr Enterprise5.2%
Other85.4%
Test Management Tools
 

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.
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

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is its support for many automation technologies."
"It has a brand new look and feel, comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."
"Quality Center is our testing management tool; when you're running a global team with more than 120 QA staff around the world, you need one repository to write, run, monitor, and share your test cases between teams."
"We have a pretty strong emphasis on quality, so ALM is our gold source repository for quality."
"My clients were able to implement an end-to-end process for software testing."
"Defect management, because it has allowed me to manage the defects throughout its lifecycle (from being opened to its resolution – closed); who is assigned to it and working on it, what are the issues, and why it is being held up."
"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."
"What caused us to switch to this solution was the customizability."
"It has a very intuitive user experience."
"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'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."
"It has a very intuitive user experience."
"It has 90% of the basic features you need without having to pay a lot of extra money."
"Zephyr Enterprise is a stable solution."
"At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements."
"It has integration with test automation tools."
 

Cons

"Full product is very complex plus the licensing left much to be improved."
"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."
"Licensing model is relatively expensive compared to alternate solutions."
"The uploading of test scripts can get a little cumbersome and that is a very sensitive task. They could improve on that a lot. It's really important that this gets better as I'm loading close to a thousand test scripts per cycle."
"Performance issues are very common. The degradation of performance and consequent failures continuously happen."
"In future releases I'd like to see better reporting, a more simplified UI, and improved metrics."
"We have had a bit of trouble at times and, in all fairness, sometimes we felt quite left alone."
"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"
"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 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."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"Additionally, they could improve the daily reporting. It does generate reports, but they are screen based reports."
"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."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to the market, the price is high."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"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."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"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 Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Performing Arts
7%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
6%
Construction Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
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 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 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 tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
What needs improvement with Zephyr Enterprise?
Some areas for improvement, include its export capabilities. Exporting test cases, especially those with screenshots or attachments, can be cumbersome, hindering easy sharing and scalability.
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 testing, however, I would recommend it only for test management. The overall rating ...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
SmartBear Zephyr
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Hyundai, Fujitsu, Google, David Jones, Burger King, Ingenico, Websense, Dow Jones, Harris, Saab
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Zephyr Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.