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

Codebeamer vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.0
Codebeamer delivers reduced workloads and effort, simplifying certification, but may challenge Machine Learning Ops integration during AUTOSPICE implementations.
Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText Application Quality Management improves efficiency, collaboration, and project tracking, leading to substantial time and cost savings.
ROI can manifest through cost savings and increased development speed.
National Manager - PLM Business at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Codebeamer saves time and money for certain use cases, such as AUTOSPICE implementations.
Architect at itcinfotech
The solution has produced a return on investment.
Independent Technical Consultant at i4c
It acts as an enabler for effective test and program management.
Partner at IS Nordic AS
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.3
Users find Codebeamer's support transparent and responsive, though some desire hotline chat and Chinese documentation for complex issues.
Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Application Quality Management is praised for responsive support, though some users experience delays and varying service quality.
If I raise an issue as high priority, I receive responses in six to eight hours.
Independent Technical Consultant at i4c
For out-of-the-box support, the customer service from PTC is satisfactory.
Architect at itcinfotech
Technical support has been excellent.
President at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Quality is always high yet not perfect.
Partner at IS Nordic AS
I am mostly happy with the technical support from OpenText ALM _ Quality Center.
Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.8
Codebeamer is highly scalable across platforms, supports growth well, but could improve documentation for new users.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText Application Quality Management is adaptable, scalable, and flexible, handling large projects well despite minor licensing and performance issues.
In a project, I have experienced up to 180 licenses running during peak times and as low as ten licenses during downtime without facing upgrade or downgrade issues.
Independent Technical Consultant at i4c
It should come with documentation that is accessible for users, especially for newcomers who might not have any prior knowledge.
Software Engineer at Festo AG
On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the scalability of Codebeamer as eight or nine because it is a highly scalable solution.
National Manager - PLM Business at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
OpenText ALM Quality Center is definitely scalable.
President at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
Codebeamer is stable with occasional glitches and compatibility issues, but generally reliable with scalability improving on larger servers.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText Application Quality Management is stable and dependable, with minor issues often tied to network or hardware, not software.
Running it independently or with a bigger server generally doesn't cause any issues.
Independent Technical Consultant at i4c
From a scale of one to ten, I would rate the stability of Codebeamer as eight to nine because the solution is highly stable.
National Manager - PLM Business at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
There were stability issues due to version compatibility.
Architect at itcinfotech
From a stability standpoint, OpenText ALM Quality Center has been pretty good.
President at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
 

Room For Improvement

Codebeamer requires usability enhancements, better integration, improved design, language support, customization, and streamlined documentation for various industries.
OpenText Application Quality Management faces high costs, poor usability, limited integration, and requires better reporting and performance enhancements.
Older versions of PDM Windchill face compatibility issues with newer versions of Codebeamer, requiring users to downgrade Codebeamer to establish integration.
Architect at itcinfotech
For a client with a medium configuration server, Codebeamer did not work initially until the system was upgraded.
Independent Technical Consultant at i4c
There should be more integration tools available.
National Manager - PLM Business at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.
Sap Fico Consultant at Avient Corporation
The user-friendly nature could be enhanced as the interface isn’t intuitive.
President at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the market.
Partner at IS Nordic AS
 

Setup Cost

Codebeamer is moderately priced, offering valuable features and scalability, satisfying users with its balance of cost and functionality.
OpenText Application Quality Management is costly for users, prompting negotiations and exploration of alternatives like JIRA due to expenses.
Codebeamer is on the expensive side, but it provides ready-made modules for standards like ASPICE and ISO 26262, which might justify the cost for customers looking for those solutions.
Architect at itcinfotech
Codebeamer is fairly priced against competition.
National Manager - PLM Business at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
President at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
 

Valuable Features

Codebeamer offers full traceability, customizable templates, seamless integrations, and excels in regulatory compliance and industry-specific modules.
OpenText Application Quality Management excels in traceability, integration, customization, centralized management, and collaboration, enhancing project efficiency and scalability.
Codebeamer saves on time and resources with its web-based client, eliminating the need to install it on every system.
Architect at itcinfotech
Its integration capability is very high, with almost eighty to eighty-five percent of integrations available readily out of the box, minimizing the need for specific integration-related work.
Independent Technical Consultant at i4c
The requirements management aspect of Codebeamer is critical because it helps various industries, such as automotive or medical devices, to capture requirements based on industry-specific standards and processes.
National Manager - PLM Business at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
The integration with internal applications and CollabNet is made possible through exposed APIs, allowing necessary integrations.
President at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results.
Partner at IS Nordic AS
We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered.
Senior Test Analyst at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
 

Categories and Ranking

Codebeamer
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Codebeamer is 7.7%, up from 7.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 4.6%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management4.6%
Codebeamer7.7%
Other87.7%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

SHRINIVAS ALAGERI - PeerSpot reviewer
Architect at itcinfotech
Built-in project management modules simplify processes while compatibility improvements are needed
Codebeamer could improve its customization capabilities and integration options. For instance, older versions of PDM Windchill face compatibility issues with newer versions of Codebeamer, requiring users to downgrade Codebeamer to establish integration. The installation on Linux can be tricky, and backward compatibility needs enhancement. Also, Codebeamer struggles with some DevOps integrations and lacks AI features for enhanced user assistance.
GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
13%
Healthcare Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Performing Arts
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise162
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about codeBeamer ALM?
The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for codeBeamer ALM?
Codebeamer is fairly priced against competition. Customers prefer it due to its pricing, scalability, features, functionality, and integration with multiple tools. On a scale of one to ten, I would...
What needs improvement with codeBeamer ALM?
I would like to improve the speed of Codebeamer, and what I believe is lacking is a way to define or set up role-specific user interfaces. Codebeamer is a very powerful tool, but the experienced us...
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

codeBeamer ALM
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Medtronic, Align Technology, Daimler, Samsung, Harman, Dassault
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about Codebeamer vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.