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

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category. IBM is ranked #13 with an average rating of 6.5, while OpenText is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.0. IBM holds a 3.7% mindshare in ALM, compared to OpenText’s 4.7% mindshare. Additionally, 77% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle M...

Read 20 IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) reviews

1,744 Views
1,727 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

OpenText Software Delivery ...

Read 41 OpenText Software Delivery Management reviews

3,307 Views
3,109 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

IBM Engineering Lifecycle M...

OpenText Software Delivery ...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management and OpenText Software Delivery Management are competing products in the realm of software delivery and lifecycle management. IBM ELM holds an edge in support and seamless integration within its ecosystem, while OpenText offers a robust feature set and adaptability.

Features: IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management provides integrated tools that streamline development processes with exceptional traceability and reporting features. Key capabilities include requirements management, model-based systems engineering, and robust workflow capabilities. OpenText Software Delivery Management is known for its versatile collaboration tools, offering end-to-end visibility and strong process automation. Its standout features include extensive collaboration facilities, agile support at both team and portfolio levels, and comprehensive test management.

Room for Improvement: IBM ELM could enhance its user interface to be more intuitive and modern. The initial setup process might be complex for new users, and there is potential to improve the cloud integration capabilities. OpenText Software Delivery Management would benefit from offering more sophisticated reporting tools. Additionally, the user customization options could be expanded, and the integration capabilities with third-party tools could be improved.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM ELM is noted for its extensive support and expertise, benefiting organizations within the IBM ecosystem through a centralized deployment model. In contrast, OpenText Software Delivery Management offers flexible deployment options, including cloud-based solutions, and is recognized for efficient customer service, satisfying organizations seeking adaptable strategies.

Pricing and ROI: IBM ELM involves a higher initial setup cost, but it provides strong ROI, especially for organizations using IBM products, with long-term integration benefits. OpenText Software Delivery Management presents a competitive pricing model, offering substantial ROI due to its adaptable solutions and lower initial investment, appealing to companies seeking cost-effective options.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

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

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,665 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 Engineering Lifecycle M...

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

13th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

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

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
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Software Delivery Management	4.7%
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)	3.7%
Other	91.6%

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Featured Reviews

Juergen Albrecht

Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH

Combining tools for effective data analysis while customization and integration need improvement

The most valuable feature is how IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) allows me to present to the customer what the actual software, even hardware, will do. It helps them gain an impression of the complexity of the functionality and find an easier way to decide whether to implement it. A picture says more than one thousand words, which is why I work with the combination of ELM and the specification of DOORS. The automation capabilities I built use column-based scripts for analysis to search, fetch, and transfer information. When I open modules, it automatically analyzes the changes since the last opening by me.

Read full review

Peter-Paul Eijkenboom

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.

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

"You can customize the board according to your needs."

"The word emulation and importing is good."

"The cataloging is a very valuable feature. For a lot of enterprises, they end up not knowing which applications do specific features. The cataloging helps with this. It's not that verbose, but it still gives you allowances to put in more detail."

"I would rate the stability of this product a nine out of ten."

"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."

"The solution is customizable."

"The tools for requirement capture we have found very useful."

"We have something called the GC (global configuration), which is a unique feature compared to any other competitor we have in the ALM space."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) pros

"The dashboards and metric reporting are valuable features."

"With an Octane project, we have our automation, our requirements, our tests, our pipeline into build-and-deploy, and the ability to identify problem areas. It makes things quicker because it's more along the lines of an automated process."

"The interface is user-friendly."

"It's brought our entire team into a single tool. We're all looking at the same real-time data. Our project management office has been able to set up dashboards for individual teams, and do comparisons by teams, of integration, and cross-team integration, burn-up, burn-down, and cumulative flow..."

"The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions."

"The defect management gives us full-fledged capabilities for handling defects, including capturing the details of the defects and even screenshotting the defect cases. The defect management is comprehensive."

"The solution natively supports Agile-Waterfall hybrid software development at an enterprise scale. This is very important to us. Because even though the company wishes to go Agile, we still have projects which follow a Waterfall methodology. In order for us to accommodate both, we needed some sort of hybrid system. Because if we are using a fully Agile system, then the reporting might not be correctly extracted."

"It is a very scalable solution."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management pros

Cons

"Some improvements to the user interface (UI) would be helpful, such as exposing more services to make it easier to customize to the needs of each customer."

"The solution can improve in the development area and the customized applications."

"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."

"The interconnectivity between packages is a major support problem and can be improved."

"The stability of IBM Rational ALM could be improved."

"The directory designer manager is uncivil. The design manager is clearly really unstable."

"The GUI is a little bit outdated."

"The reporting functionality needs to be improved."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) cons

"The cluster architecture that we implemented was server to server communication: Octane application to Elasticsearch and Elasticsearch to another Elasticsearch service. Recently, we found this is a security gap. The Octane application is interacting with Elasticsearch server, but that was missing from the requirements and prerequisites in the setup. The Micro Focus team has not given advice on how to implement authentication-based communication between Octane to Elasticsearch, and we found it as a gap later, then our security team asked us to fix that gap. So, there was a lot of time spent on rework."

"We have some requests to beef up the manual testing abilities and the ability to report on testing progress. All the basics are there, but there's an issue of maintainability. For example... once you plan a test and it creates a run, more particularly a suite run, you can't edit the suite run afterward... That that is not realistic with how people work. Mistakes are made and people are humans and we change our minds about things. So the tool needs to allow for a bit more flexibility in that testing area, as well as some better widgets to report on progress."

"Updating items, sorting, bulk updates—these things could have a bit more flexibility, but it's still possible to do them."

"The product's requirements management feature needs enhancement in terms of functionality."

"The reporting is lacking from a requirements matrix and a traceability perspective."

"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."

"Documentation is not clear."

"Globally, I don't see many major points of improvement. It's mostly plenty of little things, and it's weird to me that they are not in the product yet. They are really details, but they're annoying details... Today, in the tool, we've got plenty of assets we can handle, like requirements, user storage, defects, tasks and so on. And to all of those elements, we can add comments. We can add comments to any asset in Octane but not to tasks. It's just impossible to understand why it's not available for the tasks because it's available everywhere else. Similarly, for attachments, you can attach files absolutely everywhere except on automated runs, which is, again, awkward. I don't understand why on this element, in particular, you cannot do it. It's little touches like that."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"We have a contract, but I am not aware of the details."

"This product is a little expensive and we had to pay extra to have them set it up for us."

"IBM Rational ALM has both monthly and yearly licensing options."

"I rate the tool's pricing an eight on a scale from one to ten, where ten is very expensive."

"The cost of this product is very high."

"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."

"If you compare the price with the functionality, it is pretty much the same as other solutions. If you compare it to Jira, for instance, it has a lot more functionality. You don't need any plug-ins, but it's also more expensive. Once you start adding your different plug-ins to Jira, you'll probably end up with the same amount or more. There is also a yearly support cost, which is usually 25% of the initial cost of the license."

"I rate the product price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. The product is neither cheap nor 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 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."

More OpenText Software Delivery Management pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,665 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

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	32

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational ALM?

The solution is customizable.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Jira vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 18% of the time

Codebeamer vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 15% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 10% of the time

Jama Connect vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 9% of the time

PTC Integrity vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) Competitors

Jira vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 38% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 13% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 7% of the time

Rally Software vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 5% of the time

TFS vs OpenText Software Delivery Management

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Software Delivery Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

January 2026

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) report

Download IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Software Delivery Management

January 2026

OpenText Software Delivery Management report

Download OpenText Software Delivery Management product report

Also Known As

IBM Engineering Rhapsody, Rational ALM, MKS

Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane

Overview

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) offers an integrated platform with customizable workflows, Scrum planning tools, and resource management features, enhancing project execution and collaboration.

ELM supports Agile and Scrum project management through its integration with tools like Git and IBM Doors, providing cataloging, traceability, and reporting capabilities. While users benefit from requirement management and dashboard functionalities, the interface and reporting could be improved for better navigation and customization. Its cloud-based architecture facilitates compliance and auditing, making it a valuable tool for engineering teams focusing on configuration and version control.

What are the essential features of IBM ELM?

Customizable Workflows: Tailor project processes to specific needs for adaptability.
Scrum-Based Planning: Facilitate Agile project management with Scrum tools.
Resource Management: Efficiently allocate and track resource usage.
Integration Capabilities: Seamlessly integrate with Git and IBM Doors for enhanced traceability.
Global Configuration: Manage configurations across locations for consistency.

What benefits should users consider?

Compliance Support: Provides tools essential for meeting industry regulations.
Collaboration: Streamlines team communication for smooth project execution.
Stakeholder Alignment: Enhances visibility and alignment with personalized dashboards.
Traceability: Ensures complete tracking of requirements and changes for accountability.

ELM is widely used in the automotive and manufacturing sectors for managing requirements and monitoring performance. Engineering teams leverage ELM for Agile methodologies, with central teams deploying it for end-to-end development processes including requirement gathering and backlog management. Stability and improved integration support remain critical implementation areas, along with enhanced governance features for comprehensive application.

IBM

OpenText Software Delivery Management provides application lifecycle management with Agile and Waterfall support. It features intuitive interfaces, CI/CD integration, automated testing, and robust reporting, improving project management efficiency and usability.

Designed to enhance teams' productivity and streamline processes, OpenText Software Delivery Management integrates seamlessly with Agile methodologies. Its comprehensive backlog and requirements management, user stories, and test management make it a complete tool for managing the development lifecycle. The platform aligns with DevOps, providing traceability and extensive customization options. Traceability from requirements to deployments is enhanced, making it easier for teams to track progress. It offers integration with popular tools like Jenkins and JIRA, ensuring a unified approach to continuous delivery and testing management.

What key features does OpenText Software Delivery Management include?

Versatile across browsers with consistent performance.
Seamless CI/CD integration for smooth development processes.
Intuitive interface aiding in efficiency and ease of use.
Comprehensive backlog management ensures organized prioritization.
Automated testing aligns with Agile and DevOps principles.

What benefits can users expect when evaluating OpenText Software Delivery Management?

Enhanced traceability from inception to delivery.
Improved project management efficiency through streamlined processes.
Robust reporting capabilities offering detailed insights.
Increased flexibility in customization enabling tailored experiences.
Predictive analytics for better decision-making.

OpenText Software Delivery Management is implemented across technology-focused industries, supporting Agile processes like requirements management and defect tracking. Organizations use it to standardize development workflows and optimize continuous delivery integration, choosing it for its ability to support both Agile and Waterfall methodologies within application lifecycle management.

OpenText

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

Buyer's Guide

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

February 2026

Free Report: IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management report.

See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.

We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.