IBM DOORS vs IBM DOORS Next comparison

IBM DOORS and IBM DOORS Next are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. IBM DOORS is ranked #1 with an average rating of 7.5, while IBM DOORS Next is ranked #5 with an average rating of 7.3. IBM DOORS holds a 34.0% mindshare in ARM, compared to IBM DOORS Next’s 8.5% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of IBM DOORS users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 91% of IBM DOORS Next users who would recommend it.

IBM DOORS

Read 55 IBM DOORS reviews

7,625 Views
5,215 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

IBM DOORS Next

Read 13 IBM DOORS Next reviews

3,570 Views
1,247 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

IBM DOORS

IBM DOORS Next

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM DOORS and IBM DOORS Next based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,406 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

IBM DOORS

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

IBM DOORS Next

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

5th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 34.0%, down from 35.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM DOORS Next is 8.5%, up from 7.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

UweSeufert

Senior Consultant - Technical Expert at Capgemini

Old but capable of storing, organizing, and exchanging requirements

I use IBM DOORS because my customer wants it for managing their requirements IBM DOORS is a tool from the 20th century. It is very old but capable of storing, organizing, and exchanging requirements. It helps to manage requirements efficiently, which significantly improves the way requirements…

Read full review

Roger Trackwell

System Engineering Manager at a wholesaler/distributor with 10,001+ employees

An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements

The biggest thing is that it shows cradle to grave traceability between the initial parent requirement and the lowest level, or what we call a CID, a critical item development spec. You can establish your verification plans in DOORS, and then as you get test results, you can put them in DOORS as a link or as a pointer to where that specific test resides on a company database. Then you can also write compliance rationale and add a column for coding, like pass, fail, green, yellow, red, meets, does not meet, partially meets, or whatever scoring criteria you want to use. Like I said, the best thing about it is that it provides you that visibility of your verification, allowing you to know how close you are to your pre-production activities, prototyping, go ahead, or whatever it is.

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 really enjoyed the API."

"The data logs are ver conveneint."

"I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements."

"It is a mature product that is stable."

"It is very customizable and easy to scale."

"Very customizable and can be as powerful as you want it to be."

"The program is very stable."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is traceability. We can track every requirement, including what the stakeholder must do and component-level requirements."

More IBM DOORS pros

"There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."

"One of the most valuable features is how you can tailor the modules."

"My company contacts the solution's technical support, and they are good and responsive."

"The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The traceability matrix helps to view things better. It comes with different linking rules."

"It's web-based, so you don't have anything to install."

"The "Link by Attribute" feature is useful for making links without needing to use the web interface manually."

"As far as maintaining our requirements so that we can have copies of them, it's good. I can print it out if necessary."

"The most valuable features are the versioning of requirements and the possibility to reuse them."

More IBM DOORS Next pros

Cons

"The software and GUI is very outdated."

"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."

"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now."

"The problem is that because the GUI is so bad, you either have to spend a lot of money customizing the interface yourself, or a lot of money on training."

"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them."

"I would like to see them improve in agile management the Scrum/Kanban Board to work with overseas team members."

"The web application DOORS Web Access doesn't have the same functionality as the standard client, so it's not a real substitute. For example, web Access only provides writing requirements, but you can't do much more with it."

"Both the performance and the price could be improved."

More IBM DOORS cons

"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is not a very user-friendly product."

"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation has room for improvement compared to other tools like Polaris and Jama Connect. These tools offer more flexibility and options for developers, which IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation lacks. For example, you can define your link rules in Jama Connect, but you can't do that in IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."

"As a web tool, DNG can be difficult to use if the server is loaded or your network connection to it is saturated."

"When you are in Jira or Confluence, you have some freedom in how you type in text. That's also a weakness of Confluence, however, as it opens the doors to sloppy work. In DOS Next Generation, the text is very rigorous, but it might be difficult for people who don't have the discipline. Having a way to quickly enter requirements could help. It might already be in there, but I don't know. I don't have enough experience with the tool yet."

"Be very careful how you load your DNG server. There are limits to the number of artifacts a server can handle."

"It offers a bad user experience and the usability is poor."

"The only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools."

"Both the data storage and reporting for this solution need improvement."

More IBM DOORS Next cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."

"It's expensive."

"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."

"I think it's expensive because you have to pay for the licenses to IBM and all that and maintain them."

"It is expensive to onboard additional users."

"The licensing cost is too high."

"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."

"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."

More IBM DOORS pricing and cost advice

"The cost of maintenance is €20,000 to €30,000 ($22,000 to $33,000 USD) and there are no additional fees."

"Users can buy a three-year license for about 12,000 Euros."

"The price of this solution is very high, and it increases year after year."

"If the product price were not reasonable enough, our company would not use IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."

"You are going to need a beefy server and a fat network pipe to it in order to make DNG and its companion tools work well for users."

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

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

27%

Computer Software Company

10%

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Government

Manufacturing Company

23%

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Government

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS?

The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?

Over the years, the first version cost something around 5800 euros.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS?

Compared to today, DOORS' competitors also excel in this discipline. Yet the price is too high. It's often not as generic as it used to be. IBM promised to find a way for a generic format that allo...

See all answers

What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?

The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The tr...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?

The pricing is considered unreasonable, and there is speculation that IBM may not be putting much effort into further development, possibly treating it as a cash cow.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?

There is a need for improvement in user experience, as the UI is too complex and outdated. Updates should be more frequent to ensure security and functionality, especially in addressing vulnerabili...

See all answers

Comparisons

Jira vs IBM DOORS

Compared 26% of the time

Polarion Requirements vs IBM DOORS

Compared 25% of the time

Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS

Compared 22% of the time

PTC Integrity Requirements Connector vs IBM DOORS

Compared 6% of the time

Helix ALM vs IBM DOORS

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM DOORS Competitors

Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 22% of the time

Polarion Requirements vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 17% of the time

Jira vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 17% of the time

3SL Cradle vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 5% of the time

Helix ALM vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 3% of the time

More IBM DOORS Next Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS

March 2025

Download IBM DOORS product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS Next

March 2025

Download IBM DOORS Next product report

Also Known As

Rational DOORS

Rational DOORS Next Generation, RDNG, Rational Requirements Composer and IBM RRC

Overview

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS (DOORS) is a Requirements Management (RM) software designed to help organizations manage engineering project requirements throughout the development lifecycle. It provides a central location for capturing, defining, and organizing project requirements, facilitating communication and collaboration among stakeholders like engineers, system designers, and customers. Key features include requirements traceability, version control, and impact analysis, ensuring effective implementation and testing. DOORS improves efficiency, enhances communication, reduces risks, and supports better decision-making through clear visibility into requirements. Compared to its newer, web-based counterpart DOORS Next, the mature DOORS 9 offers a wider range of features with a traditional user interface but lacks web-based functionality and modern integration with IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) tools.

IBM

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next (DOORS Next) is a requirements management (RM) software designed to help organizations manage engineering project requirements throughout the development lifecycle. It offers a central location for capturing, defining, and organizing project requirements, facilitating collaboration among stakeholders like engineers, system designers, and customers. Key features include requirements traceability, version control, and impact analysis. DOORS Next improves efficiency, enhances communication, reduces risks, and aids in better decision-making through clear traceability and version control. Compared to its predecessor, DOORS 9, DOORS Next is a web-based version with a modern interface that integrates with other IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) tools, while DOORS 9 offers a wider range of features in a non-web-based format.

IBM

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt

Major health insurer

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next

March 2025

Free Report: IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next report.

See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.

We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.