IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

Download the complete report

Helped 868,759 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

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Application Qualit...

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Quality Management Software (4th), Test Management Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 3.9%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 4.9%, down from 5.4% 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 Application Quality Management	4.9%
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)	3.9%
Other	91.2%

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

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer at Vodafone

Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities

Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

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 is the reporting of the CPU usage on the dashboard."

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

"The solution is customizable."

"The word emulation and importing is good."

"Everyone in a team can work on the same platform and share the same information."

"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."

"It's easy to use."

"The transition to a SaaS-based solution is a distinct advantage."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) pros

"It's user friendly, scalable, and very stable and strong. It's cooperative, meaning that I can assess the test to check it and follow the flow of defects, and the developers and the business can use this tool to follow the test process."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."

"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."

"It has a good response time."

"Integration with other HPE products."

"It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."

"The solution is very user-friendly."

"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

Cons

"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 features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate."

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

"The user interface requires significant improvement as it is overly complex."

"The reporting functionality needs to be improved."

"In the next release, we expect a traceability metrics configuration where we can configure the user stories. We also expect them to improve or simplify the query process."

"Improvement is needed in bridging DNG and Rhapsody and vice versa for better data exchange from both sides with some trigger technologies."

"The product must be more user-friendly."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) cons

"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."

"There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval."

"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."

"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."

"There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements."

"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"

"The QA needs improvement."

"Client-side ActiveX with patch upgrades"

More OpenText Application Quality 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."

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

"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."

"The solution is not cheap."

"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."

"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."

"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."

"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."

"It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us."

"I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."

"Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."

"It has several limitations in adapting its agility easily."

More OpenText Application Quality 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

868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

23%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

12%

Transportation Company

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

Performing Arts

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	39
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	161

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational ALM?

The solution is customizable.

What needs improvement with IBM Rational ALM?

Improvement is needed in bridging DNG and Rhapsody and vice versa for better data exchange from both sides with some trigger technologies. This would provide a visual reminder of changes in a modul...

What is your primary use case for IBM Rational ALM?

Most of my primary use cases involve the combination of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) ( /products/ibm-engineering-lifecycle-management-elm-reviews ) and DOORS, including both Classic D...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.

What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.

Jira vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Comparisons

Compared 24% of the time

Codebeamer vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 17% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 12% of the time

Polarion ALM vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 10% of the time

Rally Software vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) Competitors

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 16% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 15% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 13% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

IBM Engineering Test Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Product Reports

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Download IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) product report

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) report

OpenText Application Quality Management

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Also Known As

IBM Engineering Rhapsody, Rational ALM, MKS

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager

Overview

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management stands out for its robust Agile Scrum planning, lifecycle traceability, and tool management, offering cloud-based configurability and strong collaboration features.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management provides rich capabilities for Agile project management, facilitating requirements and test management, configuration management, and version control. Its integration with IBM Doors supports comprehensive requirements handling, and the cloud-based platform enhances collaborative efficiency across teams. Despite needing advances in user-friendliness and reporting, ELM's global configuration and compliance features make it invaluable in demanding environments.

What are the key features of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management?

Scrum-based planning: Supports Agile methodologies with rich planning tools.
Lifecycle traceability: Offers complete traceability across development stages.
Customizable workflows: Adaptable workflows with Kanban for flexibility.
Git integration: Supports efficient version control and collaboration.
Global Configuration: Manages complex configurations globally.
Compliance and reporting: Ensures robust auditing and comprehensive reporting capabilities.

What benefits should be evaluated in reviews?

Collaboration: Enhanced sharing across platforms for seamless teamwork.
Cost-effectiveness: Delivers efficient tools that optimize project spend.
Comprehensive requirement handling: Facilitates detailed requirement management through IBM Doors integration.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management is vital in sectors like automotive and manufacturing, where it implements Agile frameworks to manage requirements, conduct testing, and handle defects. It integrates into development pipelines ensuring live traceability and visibility, supporting critical engineering processes efficiently.

IBM

OpenText Application Quality Management offers centralized data management, traceability, and integration capabilities. It aids in handling requirements, test planning, and defect tracking while supporting both manual and automated testing. Challenges exist in deployment and browser compatibility.

Known for its robust reporting and flexibility, OpenText Application Quality Management is tailored for large organizations requiring a comprehensive solution supporting lifecycle coverage and seamless tool integration. Users can consolidate testing processes, manage requirements, and centralize reporting across manual and automated testing. While some face issues with project tracking, outdated interfaces, and limited browser compatibility beyond Internet Explorer, it remains widely used for regression and performance testing. Integration with tools like JIRA and support for tools such as UFT and ALM PC underscore its utility.

What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Centralized Data Management: Consolidates and organizes testing data efficiently.
Traceability: Ensures traceability across all stages of the testing lifecycle.
Integration Capabilities: Connects seamlessly with automation and other essential tools.
Test Planning and Execution: Supports both manual and automated tests in a streamlined manner.
Advanced Reporting: Provides robust options to generate insightful test reports.
Customization: Offers tailored solutions to fit specific organizational needs.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Efficiency: Increases test management efficiency across projects.
Scalability: Adapts to the varying scope of large-scale projects.
Lifecycle Coverage: Comprehensive management from requirement to defect tracking.
User-Friendly Interface: Designed for ease of use despite needing updates.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances high initial costs with long-term savings through efficient testing management.

In industries such as finance and healthcare, OpenText Application Quality Management is implemented to ensure rigorous testing standards. It supports test case creation and execution, defect tracking, and requirements management. Integration with JIRA and performance testing tools make it suitable for organizations needing synchronized testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management