Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs Polarion Requirements comparison

Parasoft and Siemens are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. Parasoft is ranked #16, while Siemens is ranked #4 with an average rating of 7.8. Parasoft holds a 1.0% mindshare in ARM, compared to Siemens’s 15.7% 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

549 Views
132 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Polarion Requirements

Read 14 Polarion Requirements reviews

2,439 Views
2,439 Comparison Views

78% willing to recommend

Parasoft Development Testin...

Polarion Requirements

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.

To learn more, read our detailed Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Polarion Requirements

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,371 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

16th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (20th), Test Management Tools (26th)

Polarion Requirements

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

4th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of Parasoft Development Testing Platform is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion Requirements is 15.7%, up from 15.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Polarion Requirements	15.7%
Parasoft Development Testing Platform	1.0%
Other	83.3%

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

Edmund Suarez

Sr. Software Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Provides 100 percent code coverage, is stable, and scalable

We use the Parasoft Development Testing Platform to verify code coverage for static analysis in our unit tests Our customers require that we perform static analysis and have no critical high errors. We must also have 100 percent code coverage for my test to verify that everything is good and…

Read full review

Effendy Mohamed

Principal Instrument and Control at PETRONAS

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."

"I like the way this solution is structured."

"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."

"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."

"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."

"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."

"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."

"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."

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 usability of the solution should also be improved."

"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."

"The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management."

"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."

"The areas of Polarion Requirements that have room for improvement include usability, and the user interface, which was a little bit poor."

"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."

"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."

More Polarion Requirements cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Costly."

"The product's price is high."

"Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."

"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."

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."

"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."

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

879,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Manufacturing Company

31%

Computer Software Company

Healthcare Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	5

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?

See all answers

Comparisons

PractiTest vs Parasoft Development Testing Platform

Compared 55% of the time

Jira vs Parasoft Development Testing Platform

Compared 45% of the time

More Parasoft Development Testing Platform Competitors

IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 70% of the time

Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 12% of the time

IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 7% of the time

Jira vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 6% of the time

Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 3% of the time

More Polarion Requirements Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

December 2025

Parasoft Development Testing Platform report

Download Parasoft Development Testing Platform product report

Buyer's Guide

Polarion Requirements

December 2025

Download 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

December 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: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,371 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.