Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo

Top 10 OpenText Application Quality Management Alternatives

Vendor: OpenText
4.0 out of 5
Badge Ranked 1
5,847 followers
Start review

Top OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to OpenText Application Quality Management based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, and TFS. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. OpenText Application Quality Management surpasses its competitors by offering comprehensive analytics, seamless integration with various tools, and robust performance monitoring, ensuring superior application quality and accelerated delivery for businesses seeking reliable, efficient, and innovative quality management solutions.

OpenText Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with OpenText, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Microsoft Azure DevOps
4.1 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management provides comprehensive test management and customization but lacks agile tool integration and offers limited browser support. In comparison, Azure DevOps excels with CI/CD pipelines and Microsoft tool integration, though its third-party integration and user interface could improve.
Download Microsoft Azure DevOps vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
OpenText Application Quality Management has higher setup costs compared to Microsoft Azure DevOps, which offers more affordable initial pricing.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management has higher setup costs compared to Microsoft Azure DevOps, which offers more affordable initial pricing.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Jira
4.1 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Jira
4.1 out of 5
Jira excels in project management and agile support, with easy integration and customizable dashboards for software teams. In comparison, OpenText's strength lies in test management, including requirements traceability, ideal for end-to-end test lifecycle management with comprehensive reporting.
Download Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
Jira setup costs are competitive, offering flexibility for teams, while OpenText Application Quality Management involves a higher initial expense, reflecting its robust capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
Jira setup costs are competitive, offering flexibility for teams, while OpenText Application Quality Management involves a higher initial expense, reflecting its robust capabilities.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
TFS
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
TFS
4.0 out of 5
TFS provides seamless Visual Studio integration, version control, and agile frameworks for comprehensive management. In comparison, OpenText ALM excels in traceability and test management. TFS offers cost-effective licensing; OpenText ALM prioritizes detailed reporting, despite its higher cost.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. TFS Report
TFS has a lower initial setup cost compared to OpenText Application Quality Management, which typically incurs a higher investment at the start.
View comparison
Pricing
TFS has a lower initial setup cost compared to OpenText Application Quality Management, which typically incurs a higher investment at the start.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Polarion ALM
3.9 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Polarion ALM
3.9 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management excels in usability and can integrate with various automation tools, prime for comprehensive test management. In comparison, Polarion ALM offers robust traceability and requirement management, ideal for industries needing strict compliance, such as medical devices.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM Report
OpenText Application Quality Management incurs a higher setup cost, whereas Polarion ALM offers a more economical initial investment. This price distinction is a key differentiator, influencing the budget considerations for prospective users.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management incurs a higher setup cost, whereas Polarion ALM offers a more economical initial investment. This price distinction is a key differentiator, influencing the budget considerations for prospective users.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Codebeamer
3.8 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Codebeamer
3.8 out of 5
OpenText offers comprehensive features such as advanced test case management and integration, making it ideal for enterprises needing extensive traceability. In comparison, Codebeamer appeals with its cost-effectiveness and industry-specific templates, providing strong performance and integration capabilities with moderate pricing.
Download Codebeamer vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher setup cost compared to Codebeamer, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher setup cost compared to Codebeamer, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Rally Software
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Rally Software
4.0 out of 5
OpenText offers robust traceability and integrations, ideal for large enterprises. In comparison, Rally, agile-friendly and effective for collaboration, suits teams needing backlog management. OpenText's flexibility contrasts with Rally's focus on agile alignment, serving different organizational needs.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Rally Software Report
OpenText Application Quality Management requires an extensive setup cost, whereas Rally Software offers a more streamlined setup process.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management requires an extensive setup cost, whereas Rally Software offers a more streamlined setup process.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Jama Connect
3.8 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Jama Connect
3.8 out of 5
Jama Connect appeals to cost-sensitive buyers with its requirements management and straightforward deployment. In comparison, OpenText Application Quality Management attracts those needing extensive integration, offering higher long-term ROI despite more complex deployment. Both products balance distinct advantages for diverse enterprise needs.
Download Jama Connect vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
Jama Connect involves a lower setup cost compared to OpenText Application Quality Management, where the latter presents higher initial investment requirements. Users may prefer Jama Connect for its cost-effectiveness in setup fees.
View comparison
Pricing
Jama Connect involves a lower setup cost compared to OpenText Application Quality Management, where the latter presents higher initial investment requirements. Users may prefer Jama Connect for its cost-effectiveness in setup fees.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Tricentis qTest
4.1 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Tricentis qTest
4.1 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management suits larger organizations with comprehensive test management features and customization capabilities. In comparison, Tricentis qTest excels in agile environments, offering seamless JIRA integration and centralized execution tracking, appealing to tech buyers prioritizing automation and efficient reporting.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Tricentis qTest Report
OpenText Application Quality Management typically involves higher setup costs compared to Tricentis qTest, highlighting a notable difference in initial investment requirements.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management typically involves higher setup costs compared to Tricentis qTest, highlighting a notable difference in initial investment requirements.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
TestRail
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
TestRail
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management offers robust enterprise-level test management and extensive tool integrations for large organizations. In comparison, TestRail provides simplicity, ease of use, and cost-effective options suitable for smaller teams with simplified deployment in cloud environments.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. TestRail Report
OpenText Application Quality Management lacks clear information on setup costs, while TestRail offers a precise estimation, highlighting a more straightforward pricing approach. TestRail users appreciate its transparency compared to the obscured costs in OpenText's model.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management lacks clear information on setup costs, while TestRail offers a precise estimation, highlighting a more straightforward pricing approach. TestRail users appreciate its transparency compared to the obscured costs in OpenText's model.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)
3.6 out of 5
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management excels in project tracking and lifecycle integration, ideal for complex engineering projects. In comparison, OpenText Application Quality Management prioritizes quality assurance and testing, making it suitable for organizations focused on product quality improvement in streamlined testing environments.
Download IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) exhibits straightforward setup costs, contrasting with OpenText Application Quality Management's potentially higher expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) exhibits straightforward setup costs, contrasting with OpenText Application Quality Management's potentially higher expenses.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Zephyr Enterprise
3.8 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Zephyr Enterprise
3.8 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management offers competitive pricing and robust support suited to diverse IT infrastructures. In comparison, Zephyr Enterprise provides superior test automation and integration capabilities, ideal for agile and DevOps-focused organizations seeking advanced features despite higher initial costs.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Zephyr Enterprise Report
OpenText Application Quality Management offers a cost-effective setup, while Zephyr Enterprise presents a higher initial cost with advanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management offers a cost-effective setup, while Zephyr Enterprise presents a higher initial cost with advanced features.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Helix ALM
3.2 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Helix ALM
3.2 out of 5
Helix ALM provides affordable pricing with comprehensive traceability and easy deployment, appealing to cost-conscious buyers. In comparison, OpenText Application Quality Management offers enhanced features with extensive test and integration capabilities, suiting those requiring detailed functionality and process integration for large-scale environments.
Download Helix ALM vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
Helix ALM offers lower setup costs, making it a budget-friendly option, while OpenText Application Quality Management has higher initial costs reflecting its comprehensive features.
View comparison
Pricing
Helix ALM offers lower setup costs, making it a budget-friendly option, while OpenText Application Quality Management has higher initial costs reflecting its comprehensive features.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Planview AgilePlace
4.5 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management ensures effective quality assurance with robust test management. In comparison, Planview AgilePlace enhances agile project workflows with flexible tracking and collaboration. OpenText appeals to enterprises seeking quality control, whereas Planview attracts those embracing agile transformation with its seamless deployment.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Planview AgilePlace Report
OpenText Application Quality Management presents a higher setup cost, whereas Planview AgilePlace offers a more budget-friendly initial investment, making Planview AgilePlace a cost-effective choice for those with budget constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management presents a higher setup cost, whereas Planview AgilePlace offers a more budget-friendly initial investment, making Planview AgilePlace a cost-effective choice for those with budget constraints.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Panaya Test Dynamix
4.3 out of 5
OpenText AQM excels in support and pricing, offering robust test management and integration, appealing to budget-conscious buyers. In comparison, Panaya Test Dynamix delivers superior features with its end-to-end automation and risk-based testing, attracting those prioritizing advanced capabilities despite higher costs.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Panaya Test Dynamix Report
OpenText Application Quality Management has moderate setup costs, while Panaya Test Dynamix offers a more cost-effective setup, highlighting Panaya's affordability.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management has moderate setup costs, while Panaya Test Dynamix offers a more cost-effective setup, highlighting Panaya's affordability.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
IBM Engineering Test Management
3.8 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management excels with integrated traceability and reporting tools, offering scalable solutions with better customer support and flexible deployment. In comparison, OpenText Application Quality Management stands out for advanced analytics and broad testing support, offering long-term value through comprehensive features despite higher initial costs.
Download IBM Engineering Test Management vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
IBM Engineering Test Management has a straightforward setup cost compared to OpenText Application Quality Management, which involves a more complex pricing structure.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Engineering Test Management has a straightforward setup cost compared to OpenText Application Quality Management, which involves a more complex pricing structure.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
ConformIQ Creator
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
ConformIQ Creator
4.0 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management provides comprehensive test management and enterprise integration valued for stability. In comparison, ConformIQ Creator, with model-based testing, focuses on automation and rapid deployment, appealing to those needing fast project turnaround and cost-effective solutions.
Download ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher setup cost compared to ConformIQ Creator, which offers a more cost-effective initial setup. The distinction in setup costs may appeal to organizations with varying budget priorities.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher setup cost compared to ConformIQ Creator, which offers a more cost-effective initial setup. The distinction in setup costs may appeal to organizations with varying budget priorities.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
PractiTest
4.4 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
PractiTest
4.4 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management offers robust analytics and reporting, appealing to budget-conscious businesses. In comparison, PractiTest provides flexible integrations and fast cloud-based deployment, attracting tech buyers seeking customization and adaptability. PractiTest's higher cost is justified by its impressive long-term ROI.
Download OpenText Application Quality Management vs. PractiTest Report
OpenText Application Quality Management requires a higher setup cost compared to PractiTest, which offers a more budget-friendly setup alternative.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management requires a higher setup cost compared to PractiTest, which offers a more budget-friendly setup alternative.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
Cognizant ADPART
1 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management excels in in-depth QA processes with comprehensive testing capabilities. In comparison, Cognizant ADPART offers AI-driven analytics and automated testing. OpenText's ease of deployment appeals to traditional setups, while Cognizant's advanced features attract those seeking cutting-edge technological integration.
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher initial setup cost than Cognizant ADPART, which offers a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher initial setup cost than Cognizant ADPART, which offers a more budget-friendly option.
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
OpenText Application Quality Management Logo
QMetry Test Management
3.0 out of 5
OpenText Application Quality Management excels in features and customer support with a focus on integration. In comparison, QMetry Test Management offers flexible pricing and robust ROI, appealing to tech buyers emphasizing cost-effectiveness and automation. QMetry also delivers extensive test automation and analytics.
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher setup cost compared to QMetry Test Management, highlighting a distinct difference in initial expense for users considering these two software solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Application Quality Management has a higher setup cost compared to QMetry Test Management, highlighting a distinct difference in initial expense for users considering these two software solutions.

Related categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Test Management Tools
Release Automation