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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Siemens Opcenter Quality comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 Quality Management Software
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Test Management Tools (1st)
Siemens Opcenter Quality
Ranking in Quality Management Software
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Quality Management Software category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 3.6%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Siemens Opcenter Quality is 2.6%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Quality Management Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management3.6%
Siemens Opcenter Quality2.6%
Other93.8%
Quality Management Software
 

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.
Naresh Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder & Director at Hiindsight Group
Integrated shop floor execution has improved traceability but still needs better UX and lower cost
Siemens Opcenter Quality's look and feel is not great. It looks like too many fields and other things. It is not Gen Z friendly because everything has to be typed. There is nothing around voice control or the ability to just speak to it. Those things are missing drastically. It looks like a web interface, but it looks more like Excel. I have to fill so many fields and readability-wise, it is not great on that front from a UX perspective. They are improving, but still not to the standards of current generation or current UI/UX design. It is a bit old.There are a lot of features which are missing in Siemens Opcenter Quality. Something that comes to mind right away is the BOM, the Bill of Material and other things. Usually, from the sender, it is sent as a Bill of Material hierarchy. There, it is treated as a part list only. Even though they have hierarchy, it is not exactly the same hierarchy that I see in Teamcenter. These things they can improve better, and that will be helpful. The user interface should change. It is not user-friendly because it is used by somebody on the shop floor. It should be so intuitive that anybody can just look at it and be able to understand. But right now, the UI looks very busy. I can say it is a complex UI. It is really expensive, too expensive. There are no major products in the market which does this. I saw some things in Europe which are open source, but not great softwares. They are open source, so they are almost free with less price, but this runs into millions. I was looking for around 10,000 users and it almost cost me four or five million worth of software.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Use all that this product can offer as there is no need to buy others that can do the same tasks that HP Quality Center does."
"ALM is for sure scalable."
"The stability is very good."
"The solution's most valuable features are its bidirectional traceability, the solid structure within the test plan, and the test lab."
"Quality Center has definitely added value as it has easy accessibility for all our employees and is very useful for defect triage and scrum meetings."
"The most valuable user feature that we use right now is the camera."
"It empowers us to do more testing, our testing is being done for customers, and the solution enables us to conduct risk-based testing by linking requirements of a certain risk factor and showing in a report once they are covered."
"I would highly recommend this product because it is a very stable product."
"Siemens Opcenter Quality has impacted my organization positively because it is very useful."
"There is a lot of value in the money with Siemens Opcenter Quality."
 

Cons

"There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval."
"Upgrades are a nightmare and documentation is difficult to understand."
"It is pricey."
"The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac."
"Integration into the UTF (earlier QTP) has little more scope to improve."
"HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall."
"Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way."
"HP is very strong on the testing side, but in the last few years with the agile methodology it has lagged behind."
"It is really expensive, too expensive."
"Siemens Opcenter Quality could be improved with a more user-friendly interface, simpler integration with MES and reporting tools, and more customizable dashboards."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to the market, the price is high."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"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."
"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Quality Management Software solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
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.
What needs improvement with Siemens Opcenter Quality?
Siemens Opcenter Quality could be improved with a more user-friendly interface, simpler integration with MES and reporting tools, and more customizable dashboards. Better performance monitoring and...
What is your primary use case for Siemens Opcenter Quality?
Siemens Opcenter Quality's main use case for me is that it works with inspection and quality data in a manufacturing environment from a reporting and data analytics perspective. I focus on improvin...
What advice do you have for others considering Siemens Opcenter Quality?
I can give a rating of nine out of ten because Siemens Opcenter Quality provides good visibility into inspection and quality data and supports manufacturing workflows effectively. The one point I d...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
Opcenter Quality, QMS Professional, Siemens QMS Professional
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Siemens Opcenter Quality and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.