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

ConformIQ Creator 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

ConformIQ Creator
Ranking in Test Management Tools
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Test Design Automation (2nd), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (13th)
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 March 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of ConformIQ Creator is 2.8%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 8.2%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management8.2%
ConformIQ Creator2.8%
Other89.0%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1518657 - PeerSpot reviewer
QE Manager at Capgemini
Feature-rich stable tool with multiple options to control output, good integration with other tools, and knowledgeable support team
The core functionality of the tool is automated test generation of optimized test suite; the tool has extensive list of options for the same. The product's integration with other tools sets it apart. It has integrations with many upstream (for requirements mapping) and downstream (export of test cases to various tools) products. It is like "plug-and-play". For any customized downstream tool, like our proprietary automation framework, support is provided for custom development. It is has features - Business AD - to use in Agile implementations. The latest version seems to have support for BDD/Gherkin as well, which we have not used much.
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

"The tool has the ability to integrate with various requirement management, test management, and version control tools."
"Though optimized and automated test generation is the core functionality, the product's integration with other tools sets it apart."
"It is a tool, and it works. It has got good linkage and good traceability between the test cases and the defects. It has got lots of features for testing."
"The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs."
"You should invest in Quality Center if you are looking for high visibility of project progress."
"They are always ahead of the pack."
"Definitely the testing, my app test case organization, being able to organize it, and standardize a quality program."
"Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs"
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"We're able to more accurately document our test results, our actual versus our expected results, with the new screenshot functionality."
 

Cons

"I would like to see the output data optionally used as input for the model, as further action in the flow."
"It would be helpful to have a feature in the tool's UI to map object locators within the system."
"Even though the 4.1 version is a far-improved version from its earlier avatars, the performance of test generation is still an issue on real-time models we have."
"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."
"The user interface is still dated. Writing test scripts in HPE ALM is generally avoided as the interface is too awkward to use."
"The reporting could be a little more robust."
"The reporting feature could be improved. It would be better if they simplified some things."
"I would like to see where the interface is better as it's not as user friendly in this release that we have, so I am hoping that it is improved with the latest version."
"Lacks sufficient plug-ins."
"This is a really burden on the team."
"Our biggest problem with ALM is the version upgrade and especially the migration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."
"The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."
"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
"The licensing fee is a little expensive."
"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Performing Arts
9%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise162
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

Conformiq Creator, Conformiq Transformer
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alcatel-Lucent, Avaya, Daimler, Ericsson
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about ConformIQ Creator vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.