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

Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs Polarion Requirements comparison

Parasoft and Siemens are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. Parasoft is ranked #14, while Siemens is ranked #3 with an average rating of 7.9. Parasoft holds a 0.3% mindshare in ARM, compared to Siemens’s 14.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Parasoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 78% of Siemens users who would recommend it.
Parasoft Development Testin...
Read 4 Parasoft Development Testing Platform reviews
  • 79 Views
  • 15 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
Polarion Requirements
Read 14 Polarion Requirements reviews
  • 2,593 Views
  • 1,524 Comparison Views
78% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

Polarion Requirements and Parasoft Development Testing Platform compete in requirements management and software testing. Parasoft Development Testing Platform is perceived to have an advantage due to its advanced features and higher ROI, despite Polarion Requirements’ more favorable pricing and support.

Features: Polarion Requirements includes traceability, integrated project management, and link tracing. Parasoft Development Testing Platform is known for its automated testing capabilities, code coverage, and comprehensive compliance support.

Room for Improvement: Polarion Requirements could improve in customer service responsiveness and advanced testing integration. Parasoft Development Testing Platform may benefit from enhanced flexibility, easier customization options, and improved administration interfaces.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Parasoft Development Testing Platform offers a flexible deployment model and extensive customer support, catering to various enterprise setups. Polarion Requirements focuses on seamless integration within existing infrastructures, yet has slightly less responsive service.

Pricing and ROI: Polarion Requirements provides competitive pricing with a lower initial setup cost, facilitating quicker ROI for budget-conscious teams. Parasoft Development Testing Platform, while more expensive, offers a higher long-term ROI due to its comprehensive feature set and testing effectiveness.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements Report (Updated: June 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements
June 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 859,129 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

Parasoft Development Testin...
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
14th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (19th), Test Management Tools (29th)
Polarion Requirements
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
3rd
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of Parasoft Development Testing Platform is 0.3%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion Requirements is 14.5%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

Ujjwal Gupta - PeerSpot reviewer
A complete test management tool that facilitates developers' unit testing
Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time. This would reduce the execution time, helping achieve goals on time, and with less effort required. I use the different licenses to manage this issue and it can be controlled by different users for functional testing.
Read full review
Effendy Mohamed - PeerSpot reviewer
Positive impact on traceability while user interface and setup require improvement
The areas of Polarion Requirements that have room for improvement include usability, and the user interface, which was a little bit poor. The user configuration had some issues; you need to know all the details, so it's not really friendly for those who are not IT savvy. Someone who has a good IT background would be able to use it, but a regular person who just knows more or has always been dealing with Microsoft Word might find it difficult to use that system. Users need skills to work with this solution and also need to have some foundation of why those technical integrations and cross-referencing have to be done in such a way through systematization, which makes it difficult and not straightforward through the visibility of the user interface.
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

"It really helps developers execute scenarios through DTP and share reports/results across the teams."
"The most valuable feature is code coverage."
"In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps."
"I would say there is value in how powerful, configurable, and user-friendly it is."
"The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now."
"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."
"I like the way this solution is structured."
"A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization."
"We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for automotive industries. There is an open API for integration with Jira as well, so for me, customization is a strong point."
"The most beneficial features of Polarion Requirements for traceability include the traceability function and also the historical and matchmaking or cross-referencing, which was very good."
More Polarion Requirements pros
 

Cons

"The solution's speed has room for improvement."
"Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time."
"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."
"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear."
"Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature."
"If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable."
"We encountered numerous challenges, such as issues with requirements, project management, timing, and planning. The main problem with Polarion at the outset, I believe, was our limited understanding of the planning phase. During that time, we were more focused on change management related to requirements. Recognizing the importance of planning has been a key realization for us. Another mistake we made was not comprehending the need to document these requirements to manage all the work items effectively. Now, we understand the significance of this documentation. As a result of these insights, we have started to see a growing number of competitors from Polarion in this field. One potential improvement could be enabling Polarion to export work items not just to Microsoft Office but also to other office tools."
"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."
"Polarion Requirement needs to have a feature where we can track changes and compare documents. Currently, we do it manually."
"It is stable enough but if you would like to work with more requirement objects, then you will get timeouts."
More Polarion Requirements cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Costly."
"Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."
"I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"The product's price is high."
"It is expensive but not for what it is. It is just the right price for what it is. Its price is also similar to other solutions."
"I believe the cost is subjective. It seems a bit pricey, but it depends on your perspective. To provide some context, I compared the prices with GitLab and Jira. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Jira's prices. However, GitLab costs around 40 euros, and DeepLab, which I recently discovered, also falls in a similar price range. I'm not sure about DeepLab's features or interface improvements, as they might have been implementing requirements management over the past six months. In contrast, Polarion costs around 50 to 60 euros based on the 2021 prices I have. While it may seem a bit expensive, it's worth considering whether the additional investment, perhaps around 68 euros per user, is justified. It might appear costly at first glance, but it's essential to acknowledge that it can greatly streamline your work processes."
"The pricing model is flexible. You don't have to pay for the full functionalities. And it's a one-time investment for the licenses. You purchase what you need and then can work with that."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
31%
Computer Software Company
11%
Healthcare Company
8%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Polarion Requirements?
In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have work...
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Polarion Requirements?
I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Polarion Requirements?
The areas of Polarion Requirements that have room for improvement include usability, and the user interface, which was a little bit poor. The user configuration had some issues; you need to know al...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

No data available
IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements Logo
IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements
Compared 55% of the time
Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements Logo
Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements
Compared 20% of the time
IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements Logo
IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements
Compared 11% of the time
Jira vs Polarion Requirements Logo
Jira vs Polarion Requirements
Compared 10% of the time
Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements Logo
Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements
Compared 3% of the time
More Polarion Requirements Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
May 2025
Parasoft Development Testing Platform reportDownload Parasoft Development Testing Platform product report
Buyer's Guide
Polarion Requirements
June 2025
Polarion Requirements reportDownload Polarion Requirements product report
 

Also Known As

Parasoft Concerto, Parasoft DTP
No data available
 

Overview

Parasoft DTP aggregates the results from across testing practices, providing intelligent and continuous monitoring of the testing outcomes for greater visibility into what is working — and what isn’t.  Includes:

- Comprehensive Reports & Dashboards

- Preconfigured compliance reporting

- Customized Advanced Analytics

- Interactive Navigation of Results

- Traceability

Parasoft
Polarion REQUIREMENTS is designed from the ground for highly effective, transparent and secure collaboration, while teams have the option to work in their familiar environments.
Siemens
 

Sample Customers

General Motors, Lockheed Martin, Qualcomm, AAI Textron, Boeing, Fidelity, Johnson & Johnson, CIBC, Penske, Thales, Dell, 
NetSuite, Ottobock, Zumtobel Group, Kªster Automotive GmbH, Sirona Dental Systems, LifeWatch, U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), PHOENIX CONTACT Electronics GmbH, Metso Corporation
Buyer's Guide
Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements
June 2025
Free Report: Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements
Find out what your peers are saying about Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.

We monitor all Application Requirements Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.