Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer comparison
Adaptavist and Broadcom are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Adaptavist is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.0, while Broadcom is
ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.0. Adaptavist holds a 2.7% mindshare in TMT, compared to
Broadcom’s 3.0% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of Adaptavist users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of Broadcom users who would recommend it.
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira are two competing products in the software requirements and testing space. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira has the upper hand due to its seamless Jira integration and user-friendly workflows.
Features: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer allows comprehensive requirements capture and test case generation and offers advanced modeling capabilities. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira integrates seamlessly within Jira, provides easy-to-use test management tools, and ensures efficient traceability.
Room for Improvement: Users of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer suggest enhancements in reporting capabilities, addressing occasional performance issues, and improving UI design. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira users point out the need for more customizable dashboards, better documentation, and enhanced integration with external tools.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer requires a more complex deployment process and is resource-intensive but is supported by timely customer service. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira has a straightforward deployment process and is generally rated as very responsive in customer service.
Pricing and ROI: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer's setup cost is considered high by users, but some find the ROI justified by its feature set. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira offers a more cost-effective setup, and users find the ROI favorable due to its integration within Jira and overall efficiency.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Categories and Ranking
Adaptavist Test Management ...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Application Requirements Management (7th), Test Design Automation (3rd)
Mindshare comparison
As of August 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 2.7%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 3.0%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable. One challenge with integrating Adaptavist Test Management for Jira into workflows is ensuring it accurately tags and incorporates all relevant stories and epics. Sometimes, it’s unclear if the tool considers all dependencies and backlog items, which can affect how risks are assessed. However, it sometimes seems to miss this high-level perspective, which can be a limitation based on how the product is designed. This has been a concern for those who use it regularly, although I don’t manage these aspects personally.
I rate Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer as 8 out of 10. It will be very nice if Broadcom has questions or comments related to my review and can reach me via email to clarify something. I want to be a reference for Broadcom. I don't have any information regarding the visual modeling function specifically. I'm not dealing with modeling requirements or generating optimized test cases in Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer. Broadcom takes a lot of information from us as end-users, and they provide fixes within two to five days maximum. My team has raised many enhancement requests and discussed them with Broadcom, and they are adding some of these features to the product itself. I look forward to receiving an email regarding these reviews, and I can add anything later if I forgot something, earning some points for this contribution on the website.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"It is a scalable solution."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"Our software development process primarily uses Adaptive Test Management for Jira to monitor real-time risks across all stories and sprint planning. Additionally, we use it to create action plans for high-priority risks."
"The support that we get from Broadcom is great."
"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."
"The modeling is a game-changer."
"Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered."
"The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases."
"Helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model."
"It helped us to move from manual testing to automation testing."
"I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."
"The solution could improve security and authentication."
"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."
"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."
"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slightly higher than similar products, maybe five to ten percent more."
"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."
"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."
"At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves.
Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."
"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."
"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."
"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."
"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."
The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slig...
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manua...
It's not affordable; it's very expensive. It would be suitable only for large customers, and a large customer will think twice before making a deal with Broadcom.
Integration with AI is an area that needs to be improved quickly. To be clear, this relates to how to use AI to improve use cases, break down applications, and review designs, as this area needs to...
This solution saves a lot of time in the software testing cycle because, with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer specifically, I am doing a flowchart, and I can extract test cases and use cases t...
Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer
Overview
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is the full, featured, enterprise ready test management solution directly in Jira. It offers full traceability across issues, requirements, test cases, and execution. The tool allows for flexibility and customisation for test plans and runs. It offers a free and flexible REST API, includes the ability to automate bulk tests, and enables seamless integration with most continuous integration tools. The in-depth reporting capability gives users the ability to analyse and share test data results between development and business teams. It’s the single source of truth to track, manage and optimise your whole test lifecycle right inside Jira software.
Drive reusability across Jira with cross-project hierarchical repositories for all test assets
Improve collaboration with flexible workflows between traditional and Agile development teams
Enhance coverage with end-to-end traceability across all test artifacts
Eliminate duplication to increase efficiency with versioning, test data parameters and shared step features
Improve visibility and functionality with 70 cross-project reports and gadgets
Reduce management time and effort, with rich APIs for integration with test automation and DevOps tools
Allows teams to seamlessly collaborate and manage multiple versions of test cases in parallel while providing an audit history of changes
Features:
Easy drag and drop organisation, planning and execution
Hierarchical folders to manage and reuse assets across Jira projects, releases and sprints
Test case libraries including versioning, shared steps and test data parameters
Test plans and runs to manage and track test execution cycles
Full traceability of test cases, requirements, test execution results and defects
70 cross-project reports, gadgets and Confluence Macros to track the coverage of your tests with advanced cross project reporting
Global and project level settings for customisation and standardisation
Custom fields for test cases, test steps, test plans and test runs
Migration function to import test cases from files or legacy test management tools
REST APIs for integration with test automation and DevOp tools
Use Cases:
Integrate CI tools such as Jenkins, Bamboo, Travis CI or other development applications like Github, Bitbucket, Datadog via the REST API for end-to-end integration across test case management, execution, and reporting
Automate testing at scale, whilst maintaining traceability inside Jira. Scaled to 10,000+ tests across multiple configurations, publishing results in Jira in under 30 minutes
Increase efficiency by significantly reducing time spent on test case specification and management
Benefit from reusability across Jira projects and single points of maintenance when reusing and organizing test cases
Improved visibility of software testing process and quality with 70 out-of-the-box reports, including real-time dashboards
Clear end-to-end traceability of requirements, tests, and defects ensuring that the delivered software meets requirements.
CA Agile Requirements Designer is an end-to-end requirements gathering, test automation and test case design tool which drastically reduces manual testing effort and enables organizations to deliver quality software to market earlier and at less cost. The optimal set of manual or automated tests can be derived automatically from requirements modeled as unambiguous flowcharts and are linked to the right data and expected results. These tests are updated automatically when the requirements change, allowing organizations to deliver quality software which reflects changing user needs.
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
We monitor all Test Management Tools 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.
