No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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

Adaptavist Test Management ...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 1.9%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.4%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira1.9%
Other88.7%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
Director of Product at Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
Has dashboard and reporting features that help us identify and address red flags
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.
Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone
Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a scalable solution."
"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."
"The program is very stable, and that is why we have so much success with it."
"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."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"My impression of the stability is very positive."
"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."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"Easily integrates with Oracle e-Business Suite."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"For me and for our organization, it's a really good product; I'm really happy with it and it meets my needs completely."
"It’s a great product for managing an end-to-end lifecycle process."
"For any company that wants a mature, highly developed platform that is constantly improving and needs to survive audits, you must consider HP ALM solutions such as HP Quality Center."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."
"We definitely feel that it has given us a huge advantage from a collaboration and time savings perspective."
"The independent view of elevated access is good, and the elevated instructions being sent to our SQL is valuable."
 

Cons

"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."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr it takes about 5-10 minutes."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"Something that needs to improve is the model of the licensing. For instance, if you have two packs from two servers, you need to buy two licenses."
"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"This product wouldn't really be suitable if a company is in an Agile and DevOps transformation program."
"The reason why I wouldn't rate it higher than seven out of 10 is because you're still using really obsolete technology like ActiveX."
"There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval."
"Reporting is almost useless, but it does allow you to extract information directly from the database through a robust API and report with your favorite tool [excel, Crystal]."
"Also, on and off, we have had some issues with the operation itself where the operation is not able to run the test or something. We have to go back and forth with the vendor and HPE (now Micro Focus) to get this resolved."
"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet."
"ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers."
"It is definitely overpriced. Most of the cost is for support that you rarely need if you have an onsite admin."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Compared to the market, the price is high."
"The pricing is expensive nowadays."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."
"The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
32%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
8%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
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...
What needs improvement with Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlen...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear,  Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.