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

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs OpenText Software Delivery Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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 Engineering Lifecycle M...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
13th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Software Delivery ...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 3.7%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Software Delivery Management is 4.7%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Software Delivery Management4.7%
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)3.7%
Other91.6%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

LasseMikkonen - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at byte
Has supported highly regulated documentation needs but requires a modernized user experience
I think usability should be improved in IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) as the top priority. If you look at the UI, it was literally designed ten years ago, and even at the time it was introduced, it was already somewhat outdated. Even though it is a professional tool, nowadays people expect at least some level of usability from their tools, regardless of how professional the task is. Additionally, if you want to utilize it on a wide scale in an organization, you need to train every person to use it. There is always a threshold for new users to start using it.
PE
Senior Test Automation Specialist at APG
Generating audit evidence effortlessly saves time and money
OpenText ALM Octane is a new product with full development ongoing, where new ideas are launched regularly. Its ability to generate audit evidence with a single click is a significant advantage, as it saves considerable time and money compared to manual processes. This efficiency is especially valuable for audits required by financial regulators.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"At the same time, if you're working from the architect or the designing team you, it's quite easy to manage the resources online."
"I would rate the stability of this product a nine out of ten."
"You can customize the board according to your needs."
"Everyone in a team can work on the same platform and share the same information."
"The solution is customizable."
"It's easy to use."
"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."
"The planning feature is rich with Scrum concepts: Sprint, Sprint retrospective, the rules in the Scrum framework."
"The most useful feature of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the dashboards, they are easy to use."
"The user experience is a lot better than any tool that I have used before. Overall, it is great. It has a smooth interface, which is very user-friendly. It makes it easier to work together and have more transparency and customization, which is very good."
"We looked at all the market-leading tools, but we did not find anything quite as comprehensive as ALM Octane. When I say comprehensive, it's not just a single tool for Agile planning, backlog management release, sprint planning, etc., but it also has a built-in, comprehensive quality management module. It also has pipelines where we can hook up with our DevOps ecosystem/toolchain."
"Backlog management is the most valuable feature. This was a capability that was missing or difficult to achieve in ALM Quality Center."
"The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services."
"It’s easy to set up."
"I like the fact that you can use it on top of Jira."
"The integration points are very good. Octane gives us a window not only into our manual testing, but also our automation testing and our performance testing. We can see all results from all three streams of testing in one place."
 

Cons

"Improvement is needed in bridging DNG and Rhapsody and vice versa for better data exchange from both sides with some trigger technologies."
"The interconnectivity between packages is a major support problem and can be improved."
"One of the complaints from users is that they have to click buttons too many times for just a simple task. Changing this would lead to a better user experience."
"The product must be more user-friendly."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved."
"The solution can improve in the development area and the customized applications."
"The GUI is a little bit outdated."
"Of course it would be related to customer experience. The solution is not user friendly at all. It needs an expert to use it, although the reporting feature was okay."
"There are some challenges when we want to integrate the tool with other products, and it takes time for a team to figure out how to do it."
"The Requirements Module could be better, to build up a better requirements process. There's a huge improvement from ALM.NET to Octane, but it's still not really facilitating all the needs of the product owners, to set up their requirements in Octane."
"Though Micro Focus ALM Octane doesn't have much of a bug, it lacks integration with some solutions. For example, my company has fairly new software, but it can't be integrated with Micro Focus ALM Octane, so integration with other software, particularly with less popular software, could be improved. Micro Focus ALM Octane also requires a lot of resources during its setup, and I find this another area for improvement. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the ability to customize the interface, especially when doing a manual test."
"There's a trend in our requests to have the ability to export data, en masse, out of Octane. There are capabilities within Octane to export data, but there are specifics around test suites and requirements and relations, as well as certain attributes, that we would like to be able to export easily out of Octane and into a database or Excel."
"Technical support can be slow."
"Octane, from an administration perspective, is very limited. The application is improving with each release but what is missing is the ability to manage users and workspaces. I would also like "usable" reporting for more than a few workspaces. Also still missing is the ability to copy a workspace or get data in or out, except for limited REST calls."
"The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality."
"Also, while there is a Requirements Module in Octane, it is very plain. It's okay to have some requirements described there, but it's not really following the whole BDD approach. I would like to have more features for requirements in there."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is a little expensive and we had to pay extra to have them set it up for us."
"We have a contract, but I am not aware of the details."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. Many of our customers are not using all the features and this could be why our clients feel the price is too high."
"The solution is not cheap."
"IBM Rational ALM has both monthly and yearly licensing options."
"ALM Octane is very expensive."
"I would say that it is an affordable product. There is an annual service fee, which is one of the additional payments to be made apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution."
"The tool's price is extremely high."
"The senior management of my company handles the purchases of the solution. However, the price per developer was a major reason we switched from Jira. Apart from the complexity and the support, the price was a major reason that a team of 20 people unanimously decided that we would prefer to go with Micro Focus ALM Octane rather than Jira. The senior management had seen some benefit in it and they preferred it over Jira because the per developer cost was less and the support was superior."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight on a scale from one to ten, where ten is very expensive."
"In my opinion, it's good value for the price that you pay."
"It will be as expensive as ALM.NET, if not more expensive. But here's a good tip: If you have ALM.NET, you are able to share your licenses from ALM.NET to Octane. You just have to define a dedicated number of licenses on ALM.NET and then you can share them with ALM Octane, with some configuration effort. This is something that you have to take into account, that there is a possibility of such license sharing that could decrease your costs. Compared to open-source tools, the price the ALM Octane is definitely higher, in terms of the licensing cost."
"Microsoft is a big challenge for Micro Focus when it comes to pricing because they are much cheaper. But it definitely depends on the complexity of the environment. If it has multiple technologies, at that point, looking at other options and Microsoft would be a feasible approach."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
22%
Government
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Rational ALM?
I think usability should be improved in IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) as the top priority. If you look at the UI, it was literally designed ten years ago, and even at the time it was i...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational ALM?
For companies in heavily regulated industries who are doing product development, IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is a good tool. It helps them create documentation that satisfies auditors.
Is Jira better or would you go with Micro Focus ALM Octane?
Hi Netanya, Basically , it all depends on the use cases for your environment and the business needs. Hope the below data may be relevant to you for identifying your needs and deciding on the approp...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Octane?
OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product. However, it offsets costs by saving time and money, thus creating a balance between expenses and benefits. Our organization with over 1500 users sees sa...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Octane?
There is room for improvement in OpenText ALM Octane's flexibility. While it aims to be as flexible as possible for a large enterprise application, sometimes there are limitations that may not meet...
 

Also Known As

IBM Engineering Rhapsody, Rational ALM, MKS
Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst
Orange, Airbus, Haufe Group, Kellogg's, Claro, Bon Secours, World Wide Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.