No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

IBM DOORS vs PTC Integrity Requirements Connector comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
PTC Integrity Requirements ...
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 23.5%, down from 32.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PTC Integrity Requirements Connector is 2.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM DOORS23.5%
PTC Integrity Requirements Connector2.8%
Other73.7%
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

Amol Dumbre - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Manager at Forvia
Integrated lifecycle management has supported global A‑SPICE projects and custom reporting
I believe the toolchain currently covers all of our requirements. Even for A-SPICE and related requirements, I can add attributes and manage things effectively because the tool is highly customizable. I can continue updating things and managing different processes. The only gap I have identified is in code-level coverage reporting. I have coverage traceability from IBM DOORS through the architecture and design, but I am unable to demonstrate code-level coverage reporting. That reporting capability would be helpful. Testing is covered very well through IBM Test Manager. The traceability to code is something I feel there may be certain gaps in, though I may not be fully aware of all capabilities since my role is different and I primarily receive reports rather than being an end user. Regarding the traceability feature, I am not an end user but rather receive reports from my team, so my perspective is limited.
Sandipan Roy - PeerSpot reviewer
Electronic System Product Specialist at Cummins Inc.
A requirement management tool that provides a good technical support along with stability
I see that when we just define the configuration management part, it is a completely different case. Somehow in our organization or current profile, we are not built to make that linkage between that requirement and the configuration management part. So, if it is making some kind of accountability there or some kind of configuration linkage, then it would be a little bit helpful. The training material for PTC Integrity should be made a little bit easier or more useful for the user. At least for the new commerce may be. If it is possible, they can make it module-wise for the PTC Integrity team. To give along with the PTC channel itself, then it might be a little bit helpful. For example, as in the MATLAB that we are using, users have ample amount of use cases there and resources by which they can explore the learning part also. So, if it is possible for PTC Integrity directly to get that one, it will be helpful for the new users.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Customer services is great."
"I have had no problem with stability and I think that it's worked very well."
"The most valuable feature is the management verification and login."
"It is a great tool for requirement gathering and elicitation."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is traceability; we can trace every requirement, including what the stakeholder must do and component-level requirements, and we can trace them easily, which is very beneficial."
"Over time, I have tried every other ARM tool out there for various customers and kept going back to Rational DOORS."
"We have different generations of all products. It lets us select and see unique attributes for each release or generation. You can use attributes to define a selection area to see which equipments are for the old versions and which ones are for the new versions. This inbuilt view is what I like in IBM Rational DOORS. So, for a database and a set of requirements, it will select and show unique attributes for a release or a generation."
"It enables us to manage our customers' requirements effectively and efficiently."
"It is a stable solution...I rate the support a nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"The user interface for the Change Proposal System could be improved."
"The low performance of the solution is probably because it is quite an old tool."
"The software is very dated and old. It's hard to get people to use it because the GUI looks like something from one of those giant Mac computers."
"I would not rate the level of customer service and technical support very highly."
"It used to be very clunky."
"Upon losing connection to VPN/internet, DOORS can lose the content written and this requires it to be redone."
"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."
"Not all Rational Team Concert operations are available from the web client. Certain operations, like creating streams or components, still require using the desktop application. They're not accessible through the web interface. And in my opinion, this limitation should be removed."
"The training material for PTC Integrity should be made a little bit easier or more useful for the user."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is expensive to onboard additional users."
"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with one being very affordable and ten being quite expensive."
"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."
"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
24%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
7%
Construction Company
6%
University
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise38
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?
Over the years, the first version cost something around 5800 euros.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS?
I believe the toolchain currently covers all of our requirements. Even for A-SPICE and related requirements, I can add attributes and manage things effectively because the tool is highly customizab...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational DOORS?
I manage the entire application lifecycle management, which includes requirement management, architecture, and software work products. I use IBM DOORS for requirements, Engineering Workflow Managem...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Rational DOORS
PTC IRC
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
Cummins, Continental
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, IBM, Siemens and others in Application Requirements Management. Updated: July 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.