Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Polarion Requirements comparison

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Polarion Requirements

Download the complete report

Helped 900,644 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

Broadcom Agile Requirements...

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

6th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Management Tools (8th), Test Design Automation (3rd)

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 June 2026, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 3.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion Requirements is 16.8%, up from 14.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Polarion Requirements	16.8%
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer	3.4%
Other	79.8%

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman

Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone

Integration capabilities enhance testing and workflow automation

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.

Read full review

reviewer2798628

Project Manager at a manufacturing company with 51-200 employees

Comprehensive traceability has supported regulated projects but review workflows still need improvement

The ability to manage requirements through the whole project life is somewhat unclear. We are not using the ability to track all requirements through the whole project life for analytics very much. We have a way to easily find all the requirements of a complex product, even if they are spread over different Polarion Requirements projects. We do not have any issues in that area, but we are not really using the analytics part of Polarion Requirements. I am satisfied with the integration capabilities for Polarion Requirements, but it depends. We encountered a lot of issues with the integration with Enterprise Architect. We were in contact with Lemon Tree company, which provides support for that integration, but we eventually decided to develop our own plugins for Polarion Requirements. That is unfortunate, but we are not really happy with their implementation. There are things that are going really well, but alongside this, there are also things that are not yet implemented, which is quite annoying for us. The main point for improvement or lack of functions that I would like to address in Polarion Requirements is really about the review process, which is a bit too limited. When we are developing complex products, we have to review big life documents or a set of work items, but there are a lot of issues with that. For example, very simple things: if you select a word and not a space in the document, you are not able to add comments, and it is not user-friendly. If you know that you have to put the cursor and not select the word, that is something people can live with, but for newcomers, it is frustrating. They will ask questions such as 'I cannot add a comment about this word' or for a selection of text. That is something annoying. You can do that in a simple Word document, but not in Polarion Requirements. Also, the ability to review a table or generated dynamic content is not possible in Polarion Requirements. For example, if you generate automatically a list of tests, you cannot click on the second one; you can only click at the beginning of the generated sections. I am somewhat satisfied with Polarion Requirements' functionality, but I feel a lack of certain functions regarding the review, which is a bit too limited. The review process is the main pain point for me, especially since we are in a highly regulated environment where reviews are crucial for us.

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

"I have seen ROI from implementing this solution in different organizations which I worked with, and the return on investment was very good because it is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."

"It removes ambiguity in requirements, meaning that there are fewer demands for clarifications afterwards."

"Integration with TDM, test data management tool, provides the ability to generate data or use identified (preset or parametrized) test data. It allows significant expansion of test coverage and flexibility, without creating new tests and needing to maintain them."

"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else."

"The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."

"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 to be run and tested on ALM as an integration."

"It reduced the effort required for test case creation, test case review, automation script generation, and maintenance of test cases and automation scripts, enabling us to reduce our QA team size by 50 percent while helping resources without programming knowledge to create automation scripts and move from manual testing to automation testing."

"None came near to this solution."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer pros

"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."

"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."

"We use the product to review and assign requirements we receive from customers."

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

"I would say there is value in how powerful, configurable, and user-friendly it is."

"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."

"I like the way this solution is structured."

"We worked with the web interface."

More Polarion Requirements pros

Cons

"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."

"Everything but the licensing was straightforward. The licensing is extremely complex."

"The only thing CA does not have today is a testing engine."

"Adding more connectivity to outside applications and the amount of detail we can export to systems of record could be improved."

"When you have long flows or models, the display can be problematic, as it necessitates zooming in on the GUI and you lose the full display."

"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."

"The biggest thing for us is the effort required to create the workflows."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer cons

"Polarion Requirement needs to have a feature where we can track changes and compare documents. Currently, we do it manually."

"In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily understandable for end-users."

"It is not a stable solution, as we had issues with shared licenses."

"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult."

"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."

"Integration can be a little tricky if you're not aware of basic computer science or programming language."

"I am somewhat satisfied with Polarion Requirements' functionality, but I feel a lack of certain functions regarding the review, which is a bit too limited."

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

More Polarion Requirements cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."

"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."

"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."

"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."

"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."

"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."

"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."

"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."

"Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."

"The product's price is high."

"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."

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

"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."

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

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Construction Company

13%

Transportation Company

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

25%

Healthcare Company

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Large Enterprise	21

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	5

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

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.

What needs improvement with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

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...

What is your primary use case for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

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...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Polarion Requirements?

I purchased Polarion Requirements directly from Siemens Benelux, but if you have any ideas to get a license at a better price, we are quite interested in discussing that.

What needs improvement with Polarion Requirements?

What is your primary use case for Polarion Requirements?

In the context of Polarion Requirements, we are using it for requirement management, for test activities, and to produce traceability metrics between requirements and tests in the context of medica...

IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Comparisons

Compared 10% of the time

Blueprint Storyteller vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 8% of the time

Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 7% of the time

Inflectra SpiraTest vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 6% of the time

Helix ALM vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 6% of the time

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Competitors

IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 68% of the time

Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 8% of the time

Jira vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 6% of the time

IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 6% of the time

PTC Integrity Requirements Connector vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 1% of the time

More Polarion Requirements Competitors

Product Reports

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Download Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer product report

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer report

Polarion Requirements

Download Polarion Requirements product report

Also Known As

Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer

No data available

Overview

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer offers clarity in requirements, reducing post-implementation clarifications. It features an intuitive UI, seamless requirement navigation, and robust model-based testing, efficiently connecting requirements to test cases.

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer automates the creation of test cases directly from requirements, streamlining quality assurance processes. Its intuitive design and seamless navigation meet users' needs while simplifying the transition from script-based to model-based testing. With strong integration capabilities, it supports continuous development, efficiently managing test data and automating workflows. Despite some usability challenges with large models and a need for better security features, the tool's ability to enhance test coverage while minimizing test cases delivers compelling value. It also offers integration with tools like Jira and ALM, ensuring smooth alignment with existing systems, though improvements in integration with testing engines and comprehensive documentation for automation frameworks would be beneficial.

What are the key features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

Model-Based Testing: Facilitates the creation of test cases directly from models.
Test Case Automation: Automatically generates test cases, reducing manual effort.
Integration with Tools: Seamlessly integrates with Jira, ALM, and more.
Workflow Automation: Streamlines processes by automating workflows and management of test data.
Test Data Management: Efficient test data handling ensures streamlined testing processes.

What should users look for in reviews of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?

Time Efficiency: Significantly reduces time spent on test case creation.
Traceability: Provides clear traceability from requirements to test cases.
Support: Excellent customer support ensures user satisfaction.
Simplified Onboarding: Reduces learning curves for new team members.
Comprehensive Coverage: Ensures maximum test coverage with minimal cases required.

In industries like software development and IT, Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is implemented to enhance the transition from script-based to model-based testing, optimizing requirements validation and simplifying manual test design. By integrating with existing development tools, it supports continuous development cycles effectively.

Broadcom

Polarion Requirements is a dynamic tool offering traceability and collaboration for managing project requirements. It is configurable with diverse integrations, supporting documentation and version control, making it suitable for technology-driven industries.

Polarion Requirements provides comprehensive management of product requirements with robust traceability and collaboration capabilities. Teams can efficiently manage documentation and version histories with real-time collaboration and API integrations. Its open architecture supports customization and workflows, allowing seamless integration with Jira and Teamcenter. Users benefit from flexibility in file support, powerful reporting, and user-friendly functionalities. Despite these strengths, there are areas for improvement, including license policy transparency and ease of use for non-IT professionals. Improved integration speed, workflow flexibility, and data management, along with better documentation, would enhance its value.

What are the key features of Polarion Requirements?

Traceability: Offers comprehensive link and track capabilities for requirements.
API Integration: Facilitates seamless connection with software tools.
Real-Time Collaboration: Enables teamwork on documents with live updates.
Customizable Workflows: Tailors process flows to user needs.
Electronic Signatures: Provides secure verification for documents.

What benefits can be expected from Polarion Requirements?

Improved Management: Streamlines requirement tracking and documentation.
Increased Efficiency: Allows faster communication and project execution.
Enhanced Compliance: Supports regulated industry standards.
Better Collaboration: Fosters team communication and coordination.

In industries like automotive and aerospace, Polarion Requirements is implemented to manage and track custom product specifications. It helps capture requirements for deliverables, streamline technical standards, and trace customer needs. Teams use LiveDocs and live reports for end-to-end traceability, which supports comprehensive systems engineering and industrial servicing in highly regulated sectors.

Siemens

Sample Customers

Williams, Rabobank

NetSuite, Ottobock, Zumtobel Group, Kªster Automotive GmbH, Sirona Dental Systems, LifeWatch, U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), PHOENIX CONTACT Electronics GmbH, Metso Corporation

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Polarion Requirements