OpenText Application Quality Management vs Polarion ALM comparison

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM

Download the complete report

Helped 900,747 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

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

6th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 6.8%, up from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion ALM is 4.6%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management	6.8%
Polarion ALM	4.6%
Other	88.6%

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

CEO 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 most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center."

"Entering requirements and mapping of requirements with test cases, writing and execution of test cases and reporting defects, and generating customized reports are valuable features."

"For any company that wants a mature, highly developed platform that is constantly improving and needs to survive audits, you must consider HP ALM solutions such as HP Quality Center."

"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."

"It is a tool, and it works. It has got good linkage and good traceability between the test cases and the defects. It has got lots of features for testing."

"We have had no stability issues so far."

"It gave us control over the development of requirements and tests needed for the bank's transition from bespoke back-end systems to an Oracle banking system."

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

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"Polarion ALM has some valuable tools for managing our targets and requirements. I think that's its best feature."

"It is a very stable solution."

"The tool's most valuable feature is its browser experience. I rate its traceability feature a ten out of ten. From the initial stage to the release, you can manage everything through a single point."

"It's extremely flexible. Configuring items is straightforward and doesn't require involving the supplier each time. We find the requirement management, test management, documentation, and dashboards very effective."

"This one tool incorporates almost all engineering tasks we need to do for one project."

"Scalability is good...The integration is quite good."

"It's all in one place, where every department can utilize the same tool."

"When it comes to functionalities like a real-time collaboration feature and traceability capabilities, Polarion ALM has had those basic features for the past five years already, and they are pretty mature products that have all the needed requirements management features, such as traceability and reporting, and even configuration management or version controlling."

More Polarion ALM pros

Cons

"Reporting is almost useless, but it does allow you to extract information directly from the database through a robust API and report with your favorite tool [excel, Crystal]."

"We had problems with Solution Manager/SAP integration and use through customizing RFC calls."

"The initial setup was not straightforward."

"We have had a bit of trouble at times and, in all fairness, sometimes we felt quite left alone."

"Costing is an area that needs improvement."

"The setup of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not easy. It is time-consuming and complex."

"The main barriers of entry are cost and implementation, especially if an enterprise implementation is the best solution"

"The defect module, while fundamental and more or less consistent over numerous versions, is an area we would like to see improved regarding how response time is measured in the standard application."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"I don't think that this solution scales well. It means that we have to split our project and use something with fewer objects in it."

"One of Polarion's shortcomings would be planning. It can handle plans, but the planning feature is very basic."

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

"Based on my understanding, the tool's integration capabilities with multiple tools is an area of concern that Polarion needs to focus on more."

"If you were to say that everything is integrated and it's a complete solution, I would say it's not."

"The planning and task management aspects of the solution were not that easy."

"Integration requires a lot of effort. You typically need to work with an implementation partner to get it done. Most connectors available for Polarion ALM are paid. Unlike other vendors offering several standard connectors for free, integrating third-party software with Polarion ALM involves discussing and coordinating with the third-party software providers, which requires effort."

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

More Polarion ALM cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"The solution is priceed high."

"Compared to the market, the price is high."

"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."

"The pricing is expensive nowadays."

"It's a perpetual license."

"The licensing fee is a little expensive."

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

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

"Software for medical devices is always expensive."

"The solution is expensive."

"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."

"It is an expensive product."

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

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

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

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Construction Company

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

30%

Computer Software Company

Healthcare Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	41
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	161

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.

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.

What needs improvement with Polarion ALM?

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...

What advice do you have for others considering Polarion ALM?

The pricing of Polarion ALM and IBM ELM is pretty much aligned. They are not at the same level, but I would say aligned according to the capabilities of the tools, with DOORS being more expensive b...

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Comparisons

Compared 21% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 5% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

Zeenyx AscentialTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Codebeamer vs Polarion ALM

Compared 18% of the time

Jira vs Polarion ALM

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs Polarion ALM

Compared 10% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs Polarion ALM

Compared 6% of the time

GitLab vs Polarion ALM

Compared 4% of the time

More Polarion ALM Competitors

Product Reports

OpenText Application Quality Management

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Polarion ALM

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

Polarion ALM focuses on requirements management, offering structured management and traceability across projects. Known for integration and flexibility, it supports collaboration with user-friendly navigation.

Polarion ALM is recognized for its ability to streamline tasks, enabling comprehensive project management without external plugins. Its interface supports real-time collaboration and advanced reporting, while document control and workflow configuration provide additional value. Despite needing enhancements in integration and automation, it serves application lifecycle management across industries like medical device development and automotive, integrating with SVN and GitLab.

What are the key features of Polarion ALM?

Traceability: Ensures seamless tracking of project requirements.
Document Control: Manages comprehensive documentation efficiently.
Workflow Configuration: Simplifies tasks with customizable workflows.
Integration: Connects well with tools like SVN and GitLab.
Collaboration: Supports teamwork with real-time sync and interaction.

What benefits or ROI should users look for?

Efficiency: Reduces time through streamlined task management.
Flexibility: Adapts to diverse project requirements.
Scalability: Grows with organizational needs.
Compliance: Supports regulatory requirements effectively.
Comprehensive Features: Minimizes need for external plugins.

Polarion ALM finds application in sectors such as medical device development and automotive, utilized for application lifecycle management, requirements engineering, and documentation. Organizations benefit from its support for DevOps, task management, and traceability, effectively capturing customer needs and managing test cases.

Siemens

Sample Customers

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

Engineering Ingegneria Informatica, IBS AG, Zumtobel Group

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM