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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Zephyr Enterprise 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 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)
Zephyr Enterprise
Ranking in Test Management Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.6%, down from 12.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zephyr Enterprise is 5.0%, down from 7.1% 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%
Zephyr Enterprise5.0%
Other85.4%
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.
JM
Director - Quality Engineering at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Integration with tool streamlines test management but needs better exporting options
I use it for test management within Jira This tool boasts an incredibly user-friendly interface that integrates seamlessly with other Jira tools. I particularly appreciate its intuitive features for designing test plans, creating test cases, and executing test cycles. Some areas for improvement,…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is still the best QA tool on the market that integrates with most of other tools we use."
"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."
"QC is a versatile Quality management tool that offers test case and defect management capabilities along with a customizable reporting process."
"As long as procedures are clear, then anyone can execute the tests."
"If you want a good tool that is robust and is very user-friendly and capable of supporting a program with multiple streams or multiple workstreams, ALM would be the perfect tool."
"It centralized all the defects in our organization."
"Using Quality Center as one tool helped us to track just one tool from beginning to end."
"Allows us to do defect resolution from logging to resolution."
"The solution does its job well."
"We use the solution for test case management."
"Zephyr really improves the testing of the product on many levels - planning, test case creation, automation goals, test reporting, and verification of the testing."
"It has a very intuitive user experience."
"Zephyr Enterprise is a stable solution."
"Now, we are getting consolidated reports in one place, we have all our metrics and repository together, and this is helpful."
"At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements."
"If anyone is looking for a good, lightweight, flexible and agile test management product, I think they would do very well with Zephyr Enterprise."
 

Cons

"We have had a bit of trouble at times and, in all fairness, sometimes we felt quite left alone."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"The UI is very dated. Most applications these days have a light UI that can be accessed by pretty much any browser; QC still uses a UI which has a look almost the same for the past 20 years."
"We don't have time to develop a lot of reporting and our customers want a lot of reporting."
"The setup of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not easy. It is time-consuming and complex."
"The product could do with more native integration for agile projects, a greatly reduced cost model and closer integration with products that are non-HP."
"Our biggest problem with ALM is the version upgrade and especially the migration."
"Too many users logged in at a particular time affects the Quality Center response time dramatically."
"Creating better default varieties of reporting would make the product much better and more popular."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"Additionally, they could improve the daily reporting. It does generate reports, but they are screen based reports."
"We faced some errors while uploading the test cases."
"The solution is not really stable. Sometimes in the past, some pages wouldn't load due to issues."
"We are looking for advanced support with integration to CI tools. This is something which Zephyr does not have today."
"We have a lot of automation for our products, and we require a utility for its integration with automation. Currently, we have to write this utility ourselves. It would be great if they can provide such a utility."
"Security needs improvement to protect customer information better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"This is an expensive solution."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"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."
"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."
"Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."
"It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."
"It costs a couple of thousand dollars for a little more than 125 users, per month."
"DFS is more expensive than Zephyr. DFS is around $32 per person, whereas Zephyr is $10 per person. There is a major difference in the price, which is the main reason why we are trying to shift to Zephyr."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Construction Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
 

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 Zephyr Enterprise?
Some areas for improvement, include its export capabilities. Exporting test cases, especially those with screenshots or attachments, can be cumbersome, hindering easy sharing and scalability.
What advice do you have for others considering Zephyr Enterprise?
I would recommend it mainly for manual testing and test management. Within Zephyrscale, they also have automated testing, however, I would recommend it only for test management. The overall rating ...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
SmartBear Zephyr
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Hyundai, Fujitsu, Google, David Jones, Burger King, Ingenico, Websense, Dow Jones, Harris, Saab
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Application Quality Management vs. Zephyr Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.