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

Jama Connect vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 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

Jama Connect
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
11th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Application Requirements Management (3rd)
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Jama Connect is 4.2%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 4.6%, down from 5.6% 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 Application Quality Management4.6%
Jama Connect4.2%
Other91.2%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

Lasse Mikkonen - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant at Contribyte
Traceability has improved documentation for auditors and regulators
The collaboration feature in Jama Connect could be improved because it is only used by a limited number of people within an organization due to license costs. For broader collaboration that includes departments like marketing and engineering, many still rely on tools like Slack or Confluence. Additionally, there are areas where usability and configurability could be enhanced.
GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"Traceability is a key differentiator for Jama Connect, especially compared to Jira."
"I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"The relationship mapping feature is especially helpful, as it allows us to connect different requirements and compliance-related documentation."
"The impact that Jama Connect provides for my company overall is significant as it saves a huge amount of time."
"The most valuable feature is the single identity provider capability, which simplifies the integration with various platforms, like Google App Store and Microsoft Azure, for providing user access."
"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."
"Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well."
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"We were able to manage test cases effectively when we were using it. It worked well for us."
"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 most beneficial feature of test management in this solution is its ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously."
"I would rate the product a seven out of ten."
"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."
 

Cons

"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"The solution is expensive."
"I think Jama Connect's change management feature is not well developed at this stage, as it lacks many steps for marks, building IDs, and the usual functionalities such as comparing past changes and generating reports automatically."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"The solution is very software-centric, and its validation piece is not time-efficient at all."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. E.g., they have always stated that, "You can monitor and create requirements," but it has its limitations. That's why companies will choose another requirements management solution and import data from that source system into Quality Center. Micro Focus has also invested in an adapter between Dimensions RM and ALM via Micro Focus Connect. However, I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool. I feel what Micro Focus did is say, "Our strategy is not to improve these parts within the tool itself, but search for supported integrations within our own tool set." This has not been helpful."
"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."
"The reporting feature could be improved. It would be better if they simplified some things."
"The solution's reporting could be improved."
"There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed."
"HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist."
"The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost seems very competitive with other offerings."
"Jama Connect is a little pricy."
"To have a single source for all the requirements and all the change requests our company gets is the most valuable feature. It has also helped us to keep track of reviews."
"If you want to have creative licenses, pricing may be an issue with the licenses, as it can become quite expensive over time to serve many people."
"The licensing fee is a little expensive."
"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
28%
Healthcare Company
9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
Government
5%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Performing Arts
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise162
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Jama Connect?
I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors.
What needs improvement with Jama Connect?
I think Jama Connect's change management feature is not well developed at this stage, as it lacks many steps for marks, building IDs, and the usual functionalities such as comparing past changes an...
What is your primary use case for Jama Connect?
I am currently dealing with all options based on what the customer wants because my goal is not to promote one tool over another, but to identify the customer's problems and decide on the most suit...
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?
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 bottlen...
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.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Deloitte, SpaceX, Omnigon, Delft University
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about Jama Connect vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.