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
1st
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 June 2026, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 23.4%, down from 32.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PTC Integrity Requirements Connector is 2.9%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM DOORS23.4%
PTC Integrity Requirements Connector2.9%
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

"Starting to use the solution is pretty straightforward. There isn't too much of a learning curve."
"The solution is stable."
"DOORS is a high-quality, high-end system-requirements development tool."
"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."
"If you have a high number of requirements to manage and if there is a need to sustain these baseline of requirements for a couple of years, it is the right solution for you."
"It is a mature product that is stable."
"I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements."
"If people need to write specifications in the context of engineering then I think that this is the best solution on the market."
"It is a stable solution...I rate the support a nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now."
"Some of the search queries could be improved."
"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them."
"Its primary failing is that Rational made the cost of the product and learning to use the product so expensive that very few people or companies were willing to absorb that overhead without a guarantee of revenue to compensate for it."
"The customer must also have the tool to import the changes and accept them as a part of the review."
"Some users complain of a clunky interface, but DOORS NG which is planned to succeed DOORS over the next 5-10 years addresses these issues and is a good up and coming alternative to DOORS."
"I think there is probably room to improve by offering free training."
"It needs word processing captioning as well as references within a module."
"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."
"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."
"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."
"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."
"The licensing cost is too high."
"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."
"It is expensive to onboard additional users."
"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
25%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
7%
Construction Company
6%
University
5%
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 IBM, Atlassian, Jama and others in Application Requirements Management. Updated: June 2026.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.