No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Application Quality Management vs QMetry Test Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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 Test Management Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st)
QMetry Test Management
Ranking in Test Management Tools
23rd
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.6%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QMetry Test Management is 1.5%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management9.6%
QMetry Test Management1.5%
Other88.9%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
VinayKumar17 - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead at Graebert India
Helped with agile testing, provides exploratory testing and screen capture capabilities but visibility of test cases could be improved
QMetry has different aspects. It provides exploratory testing and screen capture capabilities while running tests. It has a recorder integrated. If you run a test on an application, it will record every aspect of it. For example, if you execute a user scenario, it will record what the user does within the application and generate a script. This can also be used for quick automation. Moreover, if we have an automation framework, QMetry can integrate with it. QMetry can also handle load testing in web-based applications. We have integrated it with a bug-tracking system, but not for automation. It was not difficult to integrate it. This integration was mainly for reporting purposes, such as creating reports directly from QMetry.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"Helps in providing an archive of test suites for easy regression."
"By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level."
"QC is a versatile Quality management tool that offers test case and defect management capabilities along with a customizable reporting process."
"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."
"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."
"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."
"We mostly use the Defect module and then Test Plan, Test Lab, but if you ask about the most valuable feature it is the customization of any action in the ALM client."
"The best benefit was for new hires. We used to write our test cases in simple English within QMetry, so anyone who knew English could understand them. This helped with training new hires."
 

Cons

"Technical support is a black box. It's not good."
"More flexible reporting would be good."
"Some improvement to the Requirements Management are needed."
"I think that since Quality Center has had functionality added over such a long period of time, that certain modules and other HP tools could be better integrated."
"Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time."
"There were issues with the deployment."
"As an administrator, the ability to add users to their appropriate user groups from inside of the Site Administrator tool instead of having to log into the ALM project itself to make that user group assignment would be HUGE!"
"Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool."
"For me, the visibility could be improved. When executing a test case, you needed to open it separately to read the steps."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less 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."
"This is an expensive solution."
"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."
"I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
"QMetry was cheaper than Xray, which was based on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Performing Arts
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
No data available
 

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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Healthland, Stanford University, Solid Fire, Proteus, Epocrates, Cognifide, Exo, Holmes Corporation, Global Communication, University of Sydney
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.