IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements comparison

IBM and Siemens are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. IBM is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.1, while Siemens is ranked #3 with an average rating of 7.9. IBM holds a 32.5% mindshare in ARM, compared to Siemens’s 14.4% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 78% of Siemens users who would recommend it.

IBM DOORS

Read 55 IBM DOORS reviews

6,772 Views
2,309 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Polarion Requirements

Read 14 Polarion Requirements reviews

2,497 Views
1,455 Comparison Views

78% willing to recommend

IBM DOORS

Polarion Requirements

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 20, 2025

IBM DOORS and Polarion Requirements compete as requirements management tools. Polarion is preferred for its user-friendliness and adaptability, while IBM DOORS is valued for its customization capabilities.

Features: IBM DOORS offers strong customization through DXL scripting, supports traceability, and provides robust integration. It's suitable for large-scale analyses and a broad range of tool integrations. Polarion Requirements excels in document management and collaboration, integrates well with tools like Teamcenter and Jira, and enhances workflows with electronic signatures.

Room for Improvement: IBM DOORS could benefit from a more intuitive interface and improved real-time collaboration. Polarion Requirements could enhance bulk editing, offer a better user experience, and improve document review processes.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM DOORS is mainly on-premises with mixed support reviews, although improvements have been noted. Polarion Requirements offers flexible deployment including cloud options and is praised for responsive customer service.

Pricing and ROI: IBM DOORS is expensive, justifying costs for large projects with significant ROI. Polarion Requirements, though also costly, offers flexible licensing, appealing for varied organizational roles.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,592 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

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Polarion Requirements

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

3rd

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 32.5%, down from 35.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion Requirements is 14.4%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

SHRINIVAS ALAGERI

Architect at itcinfotech

Offers a well-refined ASPICE template and satisfying requirement management features

IBM DOORS effectively synchronizes with Polarion. But suppose when Polarion is running on Linux and you want to integrate with IBM DOORS on Windows, that is when compatibility issues arise. For the aforementioned issue we often receive advise in our company to migrate Polarion to Windows before integration. IBM DOORS is a heavy-duty application compared to competitors such as PTC Integrity. Exporting an IBM DOORS module is highly time-consuming for its bulkiness. PTC Integrity is a lighter solution that allows the development of a gateway template. It's crucial to consider the use cases and the other vendors that need to be integrated before using IBM DOORS. Our company is a PTC competence center, so most of our customers are from PTC. The customer integrations our company deals with include modeling tools such as Simulink, MATLAB, and Integrity Modeler to synchronize documents. The digital threat maintenance between IOD and Windchill is also a crucial part of our organization's operations. The solution should be more compatible with thin clients, there should be focus on web-based clients who can be more effective in IBM DOORS. At our company, we don't want every customer to use the thick client format with the solution. I would like to witness the seamless integration of IBM DOORS with Windchill in the future version. The integrations in IBM DOORS should be web-based, I don't prefer to use multiple plug-ins. For example, I want to integrate IBM DOORS with MATLAB, Simulink and Jenkins effortlessly which is possible in Codebeamer. I want every feature of Codebeamer to be present in IBM DOORS in the future releases.

Read full review

Effendy Mohamed

Principal Instrument and Control at Petronas

Positive impact on traceability while user interface and setup require improvement

The areas of Polarion Requirements that have room for improvement include usability, and the user interface, which was a little bit poor. The user configuration had some issues; you need to know all the details, so it's not really friendly for those who are not IT savvy. Someone who has a good IT background would be able to use it, but a regular person who just knows more or has always been dealing with Microsoft Word might find it difficult to use that system. Users need skills to work with this solution and also need to have some foundation of why those technical integrations and cross-referencing have to be done in such a way through systematization, which makes it difficult and not straightforward through the visibility of the user interface.

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

"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules."

"The solution is stable."

"Traceability on requirements for a huge project in an organization is a big gain."

"It has the features of: traceability, configuration management, and user access."

"When you install DOORS locally, you have the flexibility to do what you want with the solution. You can add functionality and do many things that you can't do with other tools or do well enough to satisfy your users' requirements."

"The program is very stable."

"I like the way we can simply link requirements with one another and with test descriptions and then automatically produce reports that are required to show compliance to our customers. It is a combination of requirements management and reporting that I like, but I really have very little to do with the reporting part of it. I don't know how easy or hard it is to create those reports."

"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."

More IBM DOORS pros

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

"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."

"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."

"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."

"A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization."

"I like the way this solution is structured."

"My company mainly utilizes the product for documenting internal standards, guidelines, and requirements. Currently, we're focusing on using it for internal purposes, but the vision is to expand its usage to include contract requirements and tracking functionalities. While we're not there yet, it has proven effective for managing our internal documentation needs."

More Polarion Requirements pros

Cons

"The interface is not very user-friendly and has not evolved in a long time."

"One thing that I would like to see is a lower-cost version of it that we could use for smaller projects. Sometimes, we do projects for commercial customers who would benefit from something like DOORS, but it's just so expensive. It's just a monster, so a lower-cost version would be the thing that we'd like to see."

"It could be more user-friendly. It's not a beautiful tool. The user interface is gray. It has only lists inside, and it's horrible when you want to add tables. It's tough to add tables and manage them. It also becomes difficult when you want to add images."

"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."

"Overall, the user experience should be enhanced."

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

"One of the things that many people complain about is it's hard to manage attributes. For example, tables or figures. This is something that can be improved."

"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."

More IBM DOORS cons

"The usability of the solution should also be improved."

"Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature."

"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."

"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."

"The user configuration had some issues; you need to know all the details, so it's not really friendly for those who are not IT savvy."

"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."

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

"The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management."

More Polarion Requirements cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price"

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

"We have to pay for a license. I think it's a one-time payment as my company hasn't notified me about more charges. I don't think it's expensive for large corporations, but it will be costly for an average person."

"IBM is a bit too expensive in terms of pricing. Customers are paying a lot for the license, and the price is quite high for this kind of environment. It is quite high as compared to what we can get today with other solutions."

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

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

"It's expensive."

"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."

More IBM DOORS pricing and cost advice

"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 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."

"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."

"Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."

"The product's price is high."

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

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

26%

Computer Software Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Government

Manufacturing Company

31%

Computer Software Company

11%

Healthcare Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

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 Polarion Requirements?

In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have work...

See all answers

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

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

See all answers

What needs improvement with Polarion Requirements?

See all answers

Comparisons

Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS

Compared 25% of the time

Jira vs IBM DOORS

Compared 23% of the time

IBM DOORS Next vs IBM DOORS

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Dimensions RM vs IBM DOORS

Compared 5% of the time

PTC Integrity Requirements Connector vs IBM DOORS

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM DOORS Competitors

Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 20% of the time

IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 10% of the time

Jira vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 10% of the time

Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 3% of the time

OpenText Dimensions RM vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 1% of the time

More Polarion Requirements Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS

June 2025

Download IBM DOORS product report

Buyer's Guide

Polarion Requirements

June 2025

Download Polarion Requirements product report

Also Known As

Rational DOORS

No data available

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

Polarion REQUIREMENTS is designed from the ground for highly effective, transparent and secure collaboration, while teams have the option to work in their familiar environments.

Siemens

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt

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

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements

June 2025

Free Report: IBM DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements 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.