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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Zephyr Enterprise comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 September 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.6%, down from 12.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zephyr Enterprise is 5.0%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management9.6%
Zephyr Enterprise5.0%
Other85.4%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.
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

"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."
"So the first impression that hits me about HP UFT 14.0 (formerly QTP) is that it seems to be a whole lot faster! But that could be subjective, as I'm running it on a high end gaming system."
"The user interface is fully web-capable; it's a website, and it runs on a browser."
"Implementing ALM Quality Center has allowed us to map our requirements with test cases and use cases properly."
"We are using the solution for multiple purposes: test management, defect tracking, traceability, requirement tracking, and test execution."
"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"Defect management is very good."
"We use the solution for test case management."
"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."
"Zephyr really improves the testing of the product on many levels - planning, test case creation, automation goals, test reporting, and verification of the testing."
"Now, we are getting consolidated reports in one place, we have all our metrics and repository together, and this is helpful."
"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 many features, but the main things that we need are the test cycles and integration with automation because we have automation for the web and mobile applications. We use it for test case management to run the test cases and get the results. At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements. We are able to get the test execution report and the test pass and fail report. This summary is delivered to our management."
"Zephyr Enterprise is a stable solution."
"It has a very intuitive user experience."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see the idea of users being flushed out more, so not just, "This defect is now assigned to a particular person," or "This person is assigned to execute a test.""
"It is not a scalable solution."
"I frankly don't recommend Micro Focus solutions. The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."
"Recently, I faced some issues while using the product on Mac-based machines, as I was unable to upload test cases."
"The reporting features could be improved."
"In future releases I'd like to see better reporting, a more simplified UI, and improved metrics."
"I think the biggest challenge with ALM is getting useful data in one place."
"The setup of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not easy. It is time-consuming and complex."
"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."
"Zephyr Enterprise needs to redesign the reporting."
"The solution is not really stable. Sometimes in the past, some pages wouldn't load due to issues."
"We would like support for the agile and behavior-driven development (BDD) approaches."
"It's difficult to export the test cases in Zephyr, especially with screenshots or attachments, making sharing test cases not very easy."
"Security needs improvement to protect customer information better."
"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

"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."
"The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
"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."
"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."
"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."
"The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."
"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.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Construction Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
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: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.