OpenText Application Quality Management vs Polarion ALM comparison

OpenText and Siemens are both solutions in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category. OpenText is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.2, while Siemens is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.3. OpenText holds a 4.6% mindshare in ALM, compared to Siemens’s 6.4% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of Siemens users who would recommend it.

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

5,872 Views
3,523 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Polarion ALM

Read 24 Polarion ALM reviews

3,418 Views
3,145 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

Polarion ALM

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

OpenText Application Quality Management and Polarion ALM compete in the application lifecycle management category. OpenText seems to have the upper hand due to its extensive reporting and integration features, though both products offer strong traceability capabilities.

Features: OpenText Application Quality Management supports robust traceability from bugs to requirements, is web-based for global access, and offers a customizable API. It is ideal for large enterprises with flexible licensing options. Its reporting and integration features enhance test case execution and defect management. Polarion ALM manages requirements effectively, provides efficient traceability, and supports real-time collaboration. Its all-in-one approach facilitates ease of use across departments.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Application Quality Management faces high licensing costs, complex project tracking, and limited compatibility with only Internet Explorer supported. Users report rigid reporting features and lack of seamless Agile integration. Polarion ALM has a complex user interface, making initial adaptation difficult without extensive training. Integration with third-party tools can be cumbersome, and planning features need development.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Application Quality Management offers flexible deployment options and generally responsive customer service, though technical support varies in expertise and responsiveness. Polarion ALM supports a range of deployment environments, but customers report mixed experiences with slow response times and inconsistent support quality.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Application Quality Management is high-priced, reflecting enterprise-level features, which may be prohibitive for smaller organizations. Its licensing model is seen as inflexible, though ROI is justified for enhanced traceability. Polarion ALM is also expensive, limiting its appeal for smaller businesses, but offers comprehensive features that make it a worthwhile investment for large organizations.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

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)

Polarion ALM

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (6th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 4.6%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion ALM is 6.4%, down from 7.1% 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	4.6%
Polarion ALM	6.4%
Other	89.0%

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

LasseMikkonen

Principal Consultant at byte

Has provided mature traceability and configuration features while supporting complex product development for mid-to-large companies

Polarion ALM can learn from Atlassian tools a lot, as the usability is not the best, and it is really narrowly focused on requirements management only. For example, if you want to do testing and test result management with it, it is very limited. Jama Connect has similar limitations, and both should really focus on developing the integrations and extendability. For example, Jama Connect does not even have an extension marketplace, whereas Polarion has a small one. However, compared to the Atlassian Marketplace where you can get whatever applications for whatever price, it is a totally different ballgame. I would highly recommend Polarion ALM add more AI features to it. I know they have started to do something, but for example, I have been developing widgets for IBM DOORS Next, AI widgets, so that you can write and analyze requirements with the AI, and I have also done the same for Jira, creating a couple of Jira applications in the marketplace as well.

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 execution module and the test planning module are definitely the most valuable features. The rest we use for traceability, but those are the two modules that I cannot live without."

"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."

"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."

"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."

"I found the ease of use most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Creating test cases is easier because the solution allows writing in Excel."

"We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered."

"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."

"Being able to manage tests as this is something very difficult to find in other products."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"The solution offers good integration."

"The initial setup of this solution was straightforward, and there were not too many problems with it."

"The technical support is quite good."

"It is a very stable solution."

"We had a nice experience with technical support."

"You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs."

"Polarion ALM is powerful in easily creating your own workflows for completely different kinds of things."

"Polarion ALM helps us better structure our customer requirements, and we can also validate the specs of our products against those. If anything changes on our side, we see the impact, and we can see the effect If a customer changes requirements."

More Polarion ALM pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"The technology used for UI and UX are not user-friendly."

"The uploading of test scripts can get a little cumbersome and that is a very sensitive task. They could improve on that a lot. It's really important that this gets better as I'm loading close to a thousand test scripts per cycle."

"Currently, what's missing in the solution is the ability for users to see the ongoing scenarios and the status of those scenarios versus the requirements. As for the management tools, they also need to be improved so users can have a better idea of what's going on in just one look, so they can manage testing activities better."

"They should specify every protocol or process with labels or names."

"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"The interface for this solution needs to be made more user-friendly to provide a better user experience."

"The user interface of Polarion ALM needs improvement as it can experience changes that disrupt workflows, especially during major updates."

"The solution's editing capabilities need improvement."

"Test management lacks an automated process."

"The weak point of Polarion ALM software is about reporting and time for extraction of the data...The quality of reporting needs to improve."

"Polarion ALM can learn from Atlassian tools a lot, as the usability is not the best, and it is really narrowly focused on requirements management only."

"The ease-of-use could be improved a little."

"The tool needs to improve its planning. It also needs to add more integrations."

More Polarion ALM cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."

"The licensing fee is a little expensive."

"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."

"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."

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

"This is an expensive solution."

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

"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

"It is an expensive product."

"The solution is expensive."

"The license model is okay for large companies but would be quite expensive for smaller enterprises."

"Our license for Polarion ALM is yearly. And it's not the cheapest tool that we've looked at. So if we had made our decision purely based on the licensing cost, we wouldn't have selected Polarion."

"You have to pay around 50-60 euros per user."

"Software for medical devices is always expensive."

"If the pricing would come down and it was more affordable then we wouldn't have to switch."

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Performing Arts

Government

Manufacturing Company

29%

Computer Software Company

11%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

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	10
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	12

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

What do you like most about Polarion ALM?

It is a very stable solution.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Polarion ALM?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Polarion ALM?

We are in our product development using Polarion ALM's functionalities. I am a power user, partly responsible for configuring the tool. We are using it for many things. The idea was to go for a req...

See all answers

Comparisons

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 13% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 9% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 9% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 8% of the time

Rally Software vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Codebeamer vs Polarion ALM

Compared 28% of the time

Jira vs Polarion ALM

Compared 13% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs Polarion ALM

Compared 12% of the time

Jama Connect vs Polarion ALM

Compared 8% of the time

Planview AgilePlace vs Polarion ALM

Compared 2% of the time

More Polarion ALM 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

Polarion ALM

January 2026

Download Polarion ALM 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

The world’s first 100% browser-based ALM enterprise solution, which enables seamless collaboration across disparate teams, multi-directionally linked work items, full traceability, accelerated productivity and automated proof of compliance.

Siemens

Sample Customers

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

Engineering Ingegneria Informatica, IBS AG, Zumtobel Group

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM

December 2025

Free Report: OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM 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.