OpenText Application Quality Management vs PractiTest comparison

OpenText and PractiTest are both solutions in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category. OpenText is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2, while PractiTest is ranked #23. OpenText holds a 5.0% mindshare in ALM, compared to PractiTest’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of PractiTest users who would recommend it.

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

6,509 Views
3,905 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

PractiTest

Read 7 PractiTest reviews

671 Views
362 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

PractiTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

OpenText Application Quality Management and PractiTest are competing products in the software testing solutions category. PractiTest has the upper hand due to its user-friendly approach and superior features deemed worth the cost according to user reviews.

Features: OpenText Application Quality Management offers strong integration features, seamless connection with enterprise systems, and extensive test management capabilities. PractiTest provides extensive customizability and visualization features, a holistic view of the testing process, and a more intuitive feature set, simplifying the testing process effectively.

Room for Improvement: OpenText could enhance usability for a more streamlined user experience, improve the test execution interface for ease of use, and expand API capabilities for better connectivity. PractiTest may improve integration options with more diverse tools, offer more advanced analytics for deeper insights, and expand documentation to support complex configurations.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText, being a complex system, may require a longer deployment time but offers extensive customer support options. PractiTest’s cloud-based model facilitates quicker implementation and provides dedicated support aimed at simplifying user processes, appearing more streamlined in deployment.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText's pricing model is cost-effective for large enterprises with a potentially higher upfront cost offset by long-term benefits. PractiTest offers a scalable pricing structure appealing for smaller teams, providing a favorable return on investment. PractiTest proves advantageous for those valuing scalability and quick ROI, while OpenText caters to larger operational budgets.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Application Quality Management vs. PractiTest Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. PractiTest

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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

OpenText Application Qualit...

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

3rd

Ranking in Test Management Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Quality Management Software (1st)

PractiTest

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

23rd

Ranking in Test Management Tools

17th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 5.0%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PractiTest is 1.2%, up from 0.3% 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	5.0%
PractiTest	1.2%
Other	93.8%

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Featured Reviews

Greg Stone

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.

Read full review

Dave Carter

Test Team Lead at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees

Flexible and intuitive with easy reporting, and good support that is instantly available through chat

It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time. This is not an issue if you only have one bug tracker but we can potentially use different tools for different projects. As an example, if you connect PractiTest to Jira for one project, that's the one you have to use for all projects. We had a requirement to connect with Jira for one project, and a different tool for another, project but it was unable to accommodate that unfortunately. I would therefore like to see it easier to integrate with bug tracking tools at project level which would give each project the opportunity to use a different bug tracker if required.

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 Quality Center feature, I find, is the solution's integration with some of our automation tools. For us, the ability to capture and record and the ease of use from a user perspective, are all key."

"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."

"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."

"I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent."

"Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well."

"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."

"Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."

"The most beneficial feature of test management in this solution is its ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."

Cons

"It is pricey."

"The performance could be faster."

"Certain applications within this solution are not really compatible with certain applications like ERP. The problem is when we're trying to use these applications or devices, the solution itself doesn't scale."

"There are great features, however, transitioning between partners and managing a large number of test cases can be time-consuming."

"When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects."

"It needs Pure-FTPd WebUI and single sign-on."

"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system."

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

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."

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

"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."

"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."

"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."

"The solution was expensive for us."

"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."

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

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Performing Arts

Marketing Services Firm

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

10%

University

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	39
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	162

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	1

Questions from the Community

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 16% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 7% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 6% of the time

Rally Software vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs PractiTest

Compared 12% of the time

TFS vs PractiTest

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs PractiTest

Compared 11% of the time

TestRail vs PractiTest

Compared 10% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs PractiTest

Compared 8% of the time

More PractiTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

January 2026

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

January 2026

Download PractiTest product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

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

Manage your QA and Testing process, controlling your testing tasks while getting complete visibility into your results, and most importantly releasing your products in a professional way

Professional end to end QA management for your manual and automation testing.

Create your manual tests and organize them based on cycles, sprints, etc.
Seamlessly integrate your manual testing with your automation and CI processes.
Reuse tests and correlate results across different releases and products.
Release your products with confidence and control.

PractiTest

Sample Customers

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

Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. PractiTest

January 2026

Free Report: OpenText Application Quality Management vs. PractiTest

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Application Quality Management vs. PractiTest and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Application Quality Management vs. PractiTest report.

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