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

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs PractiTest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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 Software Delivery ...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (7th)
PractiTest
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
22nd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText Software Delivery Management is 6.2%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PractiTest is 1.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Software Delivery Management6.2%
PractiTest1.5%
Other92.3%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

PE
Senior Test Automation Specialist at APG
Generating audit evidence effortlessly saves time and money
OpenText ALM Octane is a new product with full development ongoing, where new ideas are launched regularly. Its ability to generate audit evidence with a single click is a significant advantage, as it saves considerable time and money compared to manual processes. This efficiency is especially valuable for audits required by financial regulators.
DC
Test Team Lead at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Flexible and intuitive with easy reporting, and good support that is instantly available through chat
It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time. This is not an issue if you only have one bug tracker but we can potentially use different tools for different projects. As an example, if you connect PractiTest to Jira for one project, that's the one you have to use for all projects. We had a requirement to connect with Jira for one project, and a different tool for another, project but it was unable to accommodate that unfortunately. I would therefore like to see it easier to integrate with bug tracking tools at project level which would give each project the opportunity to use a different bug tracker if required.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The dashboards and metric reporting are valuable features for us."
"The benefits I've mentioned can be reflected as monetary benefits, which I would estimate at 35 percent annually."
"It’s easy to set up."
"A valuable feature is the pipeline, so that we can now connect to Jenkins and then have all the results from testing, from external, in the tool, so that we can see the whole approach from there. Also, We can work with labels so we have better filtering solutions than in ALM. And it's much smarter and leaner to use than ALM."
"It's a good product."
"The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services."
"The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions."
"The most useful feature of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the dashboards, they are easy to use."
"Technical support of PractiTest is awesome. They are always ready to help in any time zone, which makes them stand out from others."
"Since we started using this product, our organization's testing functionality has really improved."
"Helped organise the manual test cases so they were documented correctly, which was invaluable as it allowed for reviewing and improving of test scripts so they could be followed by a number of different people which helped with resourcing."
"PractiTest gives us the opportunity to control the testing process efficiently and saves us a lot of time that we had to spend while using other tools."
"Converting a couple of these test plans into PractiTest was amazing and made a world of difference."
"This is a good solution for a global transnational company."
"In addition, we found PractiTest very user-friendly and customizable."
"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
 

Cons

"One of the things that a lot of our project teams have complained about is the simplicity of reporting that's available in Octane, and that they have to export data out of it in order to create the types of reports that their PMO or their client wants to see."
"There is no question that everything can improve."
"Currently, Micro Focus ALM Octane is considered an old-world tool in the industry and lacks the perception of being a new-age tool among its customers."
"The cluster architecture that we implemented was server to server communication: Octane application to Elasticsearch and Elasticsearch to another Elasticsearch service. Recently, we found this is a security gap. The Octane application is interacting with Elasticsearch server, but that was missing from the requirements and prerequisites in the setup. The Micro Focus team has not given advice on how to implement authentication-based communication between Octane to Elasticsearch, and we found it as a gap later, then our security team asked us to fix that gap. So, there was a lot of time spent on rework."
"There is an opportunity for them to do a little more with the dashboarding. We still feel that HPE Quality Center/HPE ALM reporting is very powerful. We talked with R&D, and there are some things on their roadmap, but at the same time, their strategy is to connect Octane with visualization tools such as Power BI."
"I think the area of release management in the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Globally, I don't see many major points of improvement. It's mostly plenty of little things, and it's weird to me that they are not in the product yet. They are really details, but they're annoying details... Today, in the tool, we've got plenty of assets we can handle, like requirements, user storage, defects, tasks and so on. And to all of those elements, we can add comments. We can add comments to any asset in Octane but not to tasks. It's just impossible to understand why it's not available for the tasks because it's available everywhere else. Similarly, for attachments, you can attach files absolutely everywhere except on automated runs, which is, again, awkward. I don't understand why on this element, in particular, you cannot do it. It's little touches like that."
"Regarding Octane, there are some features that it still needs, but apparently they are in the roadmap."
"Needs to improve adding the ability to run tests multiple times and setting different parameters."
"It does not offer server installation, only software as a service."
"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time."
"PractiTest practically requires a lot of sandboxing, demos with their team, and online tutorials."
"Yes, there are times when server is very slow in response."
"There are some features that I would like added: an option to export a part of tests with steps."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of this product is very high."
"Pricing is the weakest point. It is expensive, but the tool has plenty of features. The main problem we have is that the pricing is very high compared to some other solutions."
"It's pretty pricey, one of the most expensive ones on the market... The value depends on if you use all the features that it has. It comes with a lot of features. The difference between the license structure of ALM and Octane versus JIRA, is that you get everything with ALM and Octane... For JIRA, you buy the pieces one piece at a time."
"In my opinion, it's good value for the price that you pay."
"Microsoft is a big challenge for Micro Focus when it comes to pricing because they are much cheaper. But it definitely depends on the complexity of the environment. If it has multiple technologies, at that point, looking at other options and Microsoft would be a feasible approach."
"The price of Micro Focus ALM Octane is too high compared to other solutions."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight on a scale from one to ten, where ten is very expensive."
"There is a conversion fee for changing licenses."
"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise34
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

Is Jira better or would you go with Micro Focus ALM Octane?
Hi Netanya, Basically , it all depends on the use cases for your environment and the business needs. Hope the below data may be relevant to you for identifying your needs and deciding on the approp...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Octane?
OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product. However, it offsets costs by saving time and money, thus creating a balance between expenses and benefits. Our organization with over 1500 users sees sa...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Octane?
There is room for improvement in OpenText ALM Octane's flexibility. While it aims to be as flexible as possible for a large enterprise application, sometimes there are limitations that may not meet...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange, Airbus, Haufe Group, Kellogg's, Claro, Bon Secours, World Wide Technology
Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Software Delivery Management vs. PractiTest and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.