Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Polarion Requirements Logo

Polarion Requirements Reviews

Vendor: Siemens
3.7 out of 5
Leave a review

What is Polarion Requirements?

Polarion REQUIREMENTS is designed from the ground for highly effective, transparent and secure collaboration, while teams have the option to work in their familiar environments.
Get the Polarion Requirements Buyer's Guide and find out what your peers are saying about Polarion Requirements, Jira, IBM DOORS and more!
Polarion Requirements is the #3 ranked solution in top Application Requirements Management solutions. PeerSpot users give Polarion Requirements an average rating of 7.4 out of 10. Polarion Requirements is most commonly compared to Jira: Polarion Requirements vs Jira. Polarion Requirements is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 65% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a manufacturing company, accounting for 30% of all views.
Buyer's Guide
Polarion Requirements
August 2025
Get the report
Helped 866,088 peers since 2012

Featured Polarion Requirements reviews

Read more reviews

Polarion Requirements mindshare

As of August 2025, the mindshare of Polarion Requirements in the Application Requirements Management category stands at 14.4%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year, according to calculations based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Polarion Requirements14.4%
IBM DOORS32.0%
Jama Connect16.2%
Other37.400000000000006%
Application Requirements Management

PeerResearch reports based on Polarion Requirements reviews

TypeTitleDate
CategoryApplication Requirements ManagementAug 28, 2025Download
ProductReviews, tips, and advice from real usersAug 28, 2025Download
ComparisonPolarion Requirements vs JiraAug 28, 2025Download
ComparisonPolarion Requirements vs IBM DOORSAug 28, 2025Download
ComparisonPolarion Requirements vs Jama ConnectAug 28, 2025Download
Suggested products
TitleRatingMindshareRecommending
Jira4.115.4%91%275 interviewsAdd to research
IBM DOORS4.032.0%88%55 interviewsAdd to research
 
 
Key learnings from peers

Valuable Features

Polarion Requirements' valuable features include requirement and test management integration, link tracing, work item specifications, and workflow processes. Users appreciate its user-friendly and configurable nature, making it ideal for collaboration, folder organization, and report generation. Flexibility through APIs facilitates seamless data exchange with tools like IBM DOORS and Jira. Traceability, document generation, and electronic signatures enhance its utility. Its ability to manage various file types while maintaining visibility and historical tracking is highlighted.
  • "The most beneficial features of Polarion Requirements for traceability include the traceability function and also the historical and matchmaking or cross-referencing, which was very good."
  • "The most beneficial features of Polarion Requirements for traceability include the traceability function and also the historical and matchmaking or cross-referencing, which was very good."
  • "In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps."

Room for Improvement

Polarion Requirements needs improvements in user interface friendliness and usability. Licensing complexity and performance issues with large work items are concerns. Enhancements are needed for workflow flexibility, import features, and test management capabilities. Integration challenges can occur without a programming background. Better document tracking and comparison, as well as risk analysis features, are desired. Some users experience difficulties with stability due to shared licenses, and traceability and bulk editing present challenges.
  • "The user configuration had some issues; you need to know all the details, so it's not really friendly for those who are not IT savvy."
  • "The areas of Polarion Requirements that have room for improvement include usability, and the user interface, which was a little bit poor."
  • "In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily understandable for end-users."

Pricing

Polarion Requirements users report that pricing is somewhat high yet comparable to similar solutions. It requires an initial purchase with ongoing maintenance fees. Costs range between 50 to 60 euros, with additional investment possibly at 68 euros per user. The pricing model is flexible, offering various licenses based on user roles, providing cost efficiency by not requiring full functionality for every user. The solution is considered efficient for managing complex products.
  • "I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
  • "The pricing model is flexible. You don't have to pay for the full functionalities. And it's a one-time investment for the licenses. You purchase what you need and then can work with that."
  • "I believe the cost is subjective. It seems a bit pricey, but it depends on your perspective. To provide some context, I compared the prices with GitLab and Jira. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Jira's prices. However, GitLab costs around 40 euros, and DeepLab, which I recently discovered, also falls in a similar price range. I'm not sure about DeepLab's features or interface improvements, as they might have been implementing requirements management over the past six months. In contrast, Polarion costs around 50 to 60 euros based on the 2021 prices I have. While it may seem a bit expensive, it's worth considering whether the additional investment, perhaps around 68 euros per user, is justified. It might appear costly at first glance, but it's essential to acknowledge that it can greatly streamline your work processes."

Popular Use Cases

Polarion Requirements is primarily used for managing custom product development, systems engineering, and department management. Users include test engineers for generating test cases, companies for internal documentation and contract requirements, and for tracking requirements and deliveries. It's effective in industries like automotive and aerospace, offering end-to-end traceability. Users leverage its flexibility for drafting, tracking, and planning requirements, utilizing features like LiveDocs for comprehensive reports valuable for top management.

Service and Support

Customers express mixed experiences with Polarion Requirements' customer service. Some users find technical support knowledgeable and responsive, while others highlight slow response times and unresolved issues. Issues with licenses have been problematic, and timely assistance is sometimes lacking. However, many acknowledge helpful and attentive service, especially from the vendor in France. Some prefer Siemens Help Desk despite delays. Prompt responses are noted, though quality isn't always high, with a Siemens rating around six out of ten.

Deployment

Initial setup of Polarion Requirements varies in complexity. Some find it straightforward, taking a few hours, while others face challenges with templates and data migration. Deployment often requires a dedicated team or engineer. Familiarity with technical guidelines like INCOSE and EARS is essential. Training is crucial, as understanding features and processes can be difficult. It's easier with minimal configurations but challenging for complex projects. A user-friendly interface is beneficial.

Scalability

Polarion Requirements is perceived as scalable by various entities. Some note its ability to accommodate numerous users, comparing favorably to other tools. Others recognize limits in scaling, observing performance issues like slowness or timeouts when resources are pushed. However, companies with large user bases report satisfactory performance, especially with the cloud-based option. Ratings vary, highlighting its scalability in technical aspects but pointing out user interface complexities that might pose challenges for less experienced users.

Stability

Most users find Polarion Requirements stable. Some note it handles a large number of work items with difficulty, leading to timeouts. Occasional stability issues are mentioned, such as problems with shared licenses. Rating-wise, some give it an eight out of ten, while others rate it a seven or nine due to areas needing refinement. Stability is generally considered high and reliable without significant issues encountered.
These insights are based on the in-depth reviews provided by peers to help you make a better buying decision.
Download our Polarion Requirements Buyer's Guide for additional reliable information.

Review data by company size

By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
By visitors reading reviews
Company SizeCount
Small Business113
Midsize Enterprise67
Large Enterprise334
By visitors reading reviews

Top industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
30%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
8%
Educational Organization
4%
Transportation Company
4%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
4%
Comms Service Provider
4%
Construction Company
3%
Government
3%
Retailer
3%
Energy/Utilities Company
3%
Financial Services Firm
3%
University
3%
Performing Arts
2%
Outsourcing Company
2%
Engineering Company
2%
Logistics Company
2%
Non Profit
2%
Insurance Company
1%
Real Estate/Law Firm
1%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
1%
Media Company
1%
Pharma/Biotech Company
1%
Legal Firm
1%
Wholesaler/Distributor
1%
Hospitality Company
1%
Religious Institution
1%
Wellness & Fitness Company
1%

Compare Polarion Requirements with alternative products

Go!

Learn more about Polarion Requirements

Polarion Requirements customers

NetSuite, Ottobock, Zumtobel Group, Kªster Automotive GmbH, Sirona Dental Systems, LifeWatch, U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), PHOENIX CONTACT Electronics GmbH, Metso Corporation

Related questions

  • 39
Serena Dimensions RM vs. IBM DOORS
  • 4
When evaluating Application Requirements Management, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
  • 15
How would you compare IBM Rational DOORS with other Application Requirements Management solutions for IT projects?
  • 5
Why is Application Requirements Management important for companies?

Product Categories

Product Categories
Application Requirements Management

Popular Comparisons

Popular Comparisons
Jira vs Polarion Requirements Logo
Jira vs Polarion Requirements
IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements Logo
IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements
Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements Logo
Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements
IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements Logo
IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements
Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements Logo
Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements
OpenText Dimensions RM vs Polarion Requirements Logo
OpenText Dimensions RM vs Polarion Requirements
See all alternatives
 
Polarion Requirements Reviews Summary
Author infoRatingReview Summary
Principal Instrument and Control at Petronas3.0We use Polarion Requirements primarily for capturing and tracing project deliverables. Its traceability features are beneficial, but the user interface is challenging. While we've seen some time savings, major improvements are limited due to usability issues.
Chief Technology Officer at Maval4.5We initially used Polarion for document management instead of its intended requirements management purpose. We've faced challenges with project management and planning due to our limited understanding, but have recognized the importance of documentation for effective work item management.
ALM Change & Deployment at MS Consulting4.0I use Polarion for Application Lifecycle Management, finding its document-like specification management and collaboration features highly valuable. However, its user interface could be improved for better user understanding, as many features are not intuitively accessible.
Wellhead Systems Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees3.5My company uses Polarion Requirements primarily for documenting internal standards and guidelines. It allows team collaboration on documents effectively, though we need a feature to track changes automatically. We previously used Microsoft Word and SharePoint, hosted on Microsoft Azure.
Senior Tech Manager at Technology and Strategy3.5I'm a test engineer using Polarion Requirements to generate test cases from customer requirements. The tool is well-designed for organizing folders and report generation but needs improvements in traceability, bulk editing, and usability. Previously, I used DOORS.
Senior R&D Engineer at Vanderlande3.5I use Polarion Requirements for industrial servicing, appreciating its link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features. However, integration is complex without programming knowledge, and improvements could include configuration imports, risk analysis, and FMA features. We chose it for its impressive metrics and results.
PLM Senior Advisor at a hospitality company with 10,001+ employees4.5No summary available
System Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees5.0I use Polarion Requirements across various industries for comprehensive project management, emphasizing traceability and customization through APIs. While effective, it needs better risk assessment features. I prefer Polarion over Jira for end-to-end requirement management and integration flexibility.