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 #3 with an average rating of 8.2, while Siemens is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.4. OpenText holds a 5.0% mindshare in ALM, compared to Siemens’s 6.1% 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

6,509 Views
3,905 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Polarion ALM

Read 24 Polarion ALM reviews

3,475 Views
3,197 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: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Polarion ALM

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 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

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 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 Polarion ALM is 6.1%, down from 7.4% 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	5.0%
Polarion ALM	6.1%
Other	88.9%

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

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

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is the alignment of the test to the execution and the linking of the defects to the two. It automatically links any issues you have to the test."

"The solution's support team was always there to help."

"You can plan ahead with all the requirements and the test lab set it up as a library, then go do multiple testing times, recording the default that's in the system."

"The setup is pretty straightforward."

"ALM is a well-known product and is one of the pioneers in providing test management facilities with a 360 degree view of requirements."

"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."

"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"The most valuable feature is the function of the ALM system."

"Polarion ALM's integration is very good and easy to use."

"It meets with everybody's needs without having to grab plugins."

"It is a very stable solution."

"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."

"It offers good performance."

"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."

"The best feature of Polarion ALM to me is its traceability link."

More Polarion ALM pros

Cons

"The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac."

"It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve its marketing. For example, Tricentis is much better at letting the market know about new solutions and updates. The migration of the tool could improve, but it can be difficult."

"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."

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

"Lacks sufficient plug-ins."

"The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard."

"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"Nowadays, the dashboard is too complex to be created."

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

"I also recently suggested that CMS consider incorporating generative artificial intelligence into the system."

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

"Technical support needs some improvement."

"The solution needs to improve its user experience and graphics."

"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and a server-based application rather than client based."

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

More Polarion ALM cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"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."

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

"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."

"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."

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

"Pricing could be improved as it's high-priced. I don't exactly know the pricing point, but previously, I know that it was really high so less people were able to use it for their projects."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

"Software for medical devices is always expensive."

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

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

"The solution is expensive."

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

"It is an expensive product."

"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."

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

881,757 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

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 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

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 17% 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

Codebeamer vs Polarion ALM

Compared 27% of the time

Jira vs Polarion ALM

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs Polarion ALM

Compared 11% of the time

Jama Connect vs Polarion ALM

Compared 7% of the time

Helix ALM vs Polarion ALM

Compared 3% 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

February 2026

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: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 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.