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

3SL Cradle vs IBM DOORS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

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

3SL Cradle
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM DOORS
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of 3SL Cradle is 2.3%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM DOORS is 27.6%, down from 34.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM DOORS27.6%
3SL Cradle2.3%
Other70.1%
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

Siegmar-Schuenke - PeerSpot reviewer
Operation manager at OpenCage
Flexible solution that manages all your needs
I mainly use 3SL Cradle to manage the requirements from service projects 3SL Cradle's most valuable feature is its flexibility in managing all your needs immediately.  3SL Cradle could be improved with better support for SysML functionalities. In the next release, I would like 3SL Cradle to be…
Amol Dumbre - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Manager at Forvia
Integrated lifecycle management has supported global A‑SPICE projects and custom reporting
I believe the toolchain currently covers all of our requirements. Even for A-SPICE and related requirements, I can add attributes and manage things effectively because the tool is highly customizable. I can continue updating things and managing different processes. The only gap I have identified is in code-level coverage reporting. I have coverage traceability from IBM DOORS through the architecture and design, but I am unable to demonstrate code-level coverage reporting. That reporting capability would be helpful. Testing is covered very well through IBM Test Manager. The traceability to code is something I feel there may be certain gaps in, though I may not be fully aware of all capabilities since my role is different and I primarily receive reports rather than being an end user. Regarding the traceability feature, I am not an end user but rather receive reports from my team, so my perspective is limited.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"3SL Cradle's most valuable feature is its flexibility in managing all your needs immediately."
"The platform's traceability capabilities are invaluable. They provide a solid foundation for certification processes and manage requirement changes across project lifecycles."
"This product can help improve how your organization proceeds through solution development."
"I like being able to sort and categorize the requirements and the exporting functions."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules."
"It's a very interesting tool. I like that it's simple. You have to create your document, add your templates, and have your headings and definitions, and it's done. You must attribute the discipline and fill out the comment field for requirements. It also provides you with unique IDs for each requirement. I like that it never duplicates IDs."
"Very customizable and can be as powerful as you want it to be."
"The program is very stable."
"It helps to manage requirements efficiently, which significantly improves the way requirements are managed."
 

Cons

"3SL Cradle could be improved with better support for SysML functionalities."
"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."
"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."
"IBM DOORS should cover all engineering functions seamlessly, not just requirement engineering."
"The kind of dashboard is not very convenient."
"The performance could be improved. It doesn't run as smoothly as it could."
"I would like to see them improve in agile management the Scrum/Kanban Board to work with overseas team members."
"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."
"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."
"IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price"
"It's expensive."
"I think it's expensive because you have to pay for the licenses to IBM and all that and maintain them."
"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."
"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."
"We have to pay for a license. I think it's a one-time payment as my company hasn't notified me about more charges. I don't think it's expensive for large corporations, but it will be costly for an average person."
"IBM is a bit too expensive in terms of pricing. Customers are paying a lot for the license, and the price is quite high for this kind of environment. It is quite high as compared to what we can get today with other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
25%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
23%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Educational Organization
5%
Manufacturing Company
25%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with 3SL Cradle?
The support is consistent globally. However, heavier support is provided in certain locations. Improvement in support is necessary. Assistance is available to acquire information and utilize userna...
What advice do you have for others considering 3SL Cradle?
If you have time to take some courses about 3SL Cradle, it will give you more time in the project to familiarize yourself with Cradle. I recommend it, but you need to do it within a very short time...
What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS?
The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?
Over the years, the first version cost something around 5800 euros.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS?
I believe the toolchain currently covers all of our requirements. Even for A-SPICE and related requirements, I can add attributes and manage things effectively because the tool is highly customizab...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Cradle
Rational DOORS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NASA, In-Depth Engineering Corporation, Avibras
Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
Find out what your peers are saying about 3SL Cradle vs. IBM DOORS and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.