IBM Rational ALM vs OpenText ALM Octane comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM Logo
1,522 views|1,122 comparisons
73% willing to recommend
OpenText Logo
7,665 views|3,898 comparisons
94% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Rational ALM and OpenText ALM Octane based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational ALM vs. OpenText ALM Octane Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The solution is customizable.""It's easy to use.""Everyone in a team can work on the same platform and share the same information.""The tools for requirement capture we have found very useful.""It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us.""You can customize the board according to your needs.""It is relatively easy to use and user-friendly once the setup is complete.""IBM Rational ALM is a very good tool. I like the management and traceability features and the test management tool. The latter is not linked with the stories and fixed management. It is really useful, and we can create test plans. We can also test some metrics related to QA."

More IBM Rational ALM Pros →

"The feature I found most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its ability to integrate with the CI/CD stack.""With an Octane project, we have our automation, our requirements, our tests, our pipeline into build-and-deploy, and the ability to identify problem areas. It makes things quicker because it's more along the lines of an automated process.""We looked at all the market-leading tools, but we did not find anything quite as comprehensive as ALM Octane. When I say comprehensive, it's not just a single tool for Agile planning, backlog management release, sprint planning, etc., but it also has a built-in, comprehensive quality management module. It also has pipelines where we can hook up with our DevOps ecosystem/toolchain.""Octane works well with the Jira portfolio to track the project with two methods: Agile and Waterfall. We can track all the testing in Waterfall or Agile and synchronize it with Agile tools.""Micro Focus' technical support is good.""The key feature is the usability. It is fast to learn and easy to use. It's very intuitive to work with. Most of the important functions are available via a few clicks, compared to other tools where I have to open a sub-menu and then a sub-menu and another sub-menu, and then press a button.""People really how easy it is to customize. In some previous tools, that has been very limited, or you had to know how to write code to do some of the customizations, or it was very confusing. Going back to the user interface, they've made the customization of the tool, the workspace settings, very easy for people to figure out and use.""Octane creates a gentle approach to Agile-based projects."

More OpenText ALM Octane Pros →

Cons
"The GUI is a little bit outdated.""The features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate.""The stability of IBM Rational ALM could be improved.""The interconnectivity between packages is a major support problem and can be improved.""IBM Rational ALM should remove the features not used by the customers and keep this product as lightweight as possible.""One of the complaints from users is that they have to click buttons too many times for just a simple task. Changing this would lead to a better user experience.""I think nowadays people are getting into Jira and other tools. What is happening is, this solution is becoming more traditional, whereas Jira and other tools are more attractive for the new users to learn and start using because of the graphical interfaces.""I would like to see better reporting features. The out-of-box reporting is - I don't want to say limited - but the focus is on the Scrum and Sprint reports. We need more reporting features regarding the history of the work, tracking it more deeply."

More IBM Rational ALM Cons →

"The reporting is lacking from a requirements matrix and a traceability perspective.""It would help us if ALM Octane got FedRAMP-certified, so our government departments could use the cloud solution. That way our external consultants could access it. We've created a URL to get to it, but if it were FedRAMP-certified and service and had support in the continental United States, that would be better.""The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality.""I think the area of release management in the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required.""The Requirements Module could be better, to build up a better requirements process. There's a huge improvement from ALM.NET to Octane, but it's still not really facilitating all the needs of the product owners, to set up their requirements in Octane.""Development of extensions or connections to GitHub actions could be better. Better integration with Azure DevOps would also help.""There's a trend in our requests to have the ability to export data, en masse, out of Octane. There are capabilities within Octane to export data, but there are specifics around test suites and requirements and relations, as well as certain attributes, that we would like to be able to export easily out of Octane and into a database or Excel.""They don't support all IDEs yet. We have Visual Studio code, which is not supported, and loved by our developers. This integration is missing. We also had to do our own in-house integration with the Confluence. That is also something that they could add."

More OpenText ALM Octane Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The price of the solution could be reduced. Many of our customers are not using all the features and this could be why our clients feel the price is too high."
  • "We have a contract, but I am not aware of the details."
  • "This product is a little expensive and we had to pay extra to have them set it up for us."
  • "IBM Rational ALM has both monthly and yearly licensing options."
  • "The solution is not cheap."
  • More IBM Rational ALM Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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 will be as expensive as ALM.NET, if not more expensive. But here's a good tip: If you have ALM.NET, you are able to share your licenses from ALM.NET to Octane. You just have to define a dedicated number of licenses on ALM.NET and then you can share them with ALM Octane, with some configuration effort. This is something that you have to take into account, that there is a possibility of such license sharing that could decrease your costs. Compared to open-source tools, the price the ALM Octane is definitely higher, in terms of the licensing cost."
  • "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."
  • "It's expensive. HPE products, and now Micro Focus, have always been expensive. The license is not cheap, and it will always be a challenge, particularly for small organizations like ours."
  • "For what it does, it's very reasonably priced. I like the licensing model as well, because it's very flexible. You can scale licenses up and down for short periods of time."
  • "In terms of pricing, it's comparable to what we had previously. It's not priced at the higher end of the scale by any means. It's priced nicely, in the middle of the market. For what you're getting, it's a very good tool."
  • "Going forward, I think we will want to explore adding more licenses."
  • "The solution has reduced our testing costs."
  • More OpenText ALM Octane Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
    772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We have some special needs. The product does not support our needs perfectly. The GUI is a little bit outdated. There are not many diagrams that help us organize or plan the work for the team. The… more »
    Top Answer:We have three modules. The DOORS module is for requirements. RTC is for storage planning and workflow planning. We also use the module for quality. We use IBM Rational ALM as the main tool to plan… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services.
    Top Answer:The product is highly priced compared to other tools. However, it offers substantial value. There is a distinction between OEM pricing and the final pricing for customers. They could understand the… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    1,522
    Comparisons
    1,122
    Reviews
    7
    Average Words per Review
    396
    Rating
    7.4
    Views
    7,665
    Comparisons
    3,898
    Reviews
    9
    Average Words per Review
    566
    Rating
    8.1
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rational ALM, MKS
    Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane
    Learn More
    Overview
    Lifecycle management capabilities built on the open, unifying IBM Rational Jazz platform can help agile and traditional teams: see at-a-glance status, access better data for decisions, manage costs, reuse the most efficient processes across the organization, manage cloud, web, SOA and mobile application design and development. Teams can also gain real-time traceability, manage work across vendors, unify across a diverse set of lifecyle tools, and provide collaborative development for continuous delivery as part of the IBM DevOps solution.

    OpenText ALM Octane helps organizations implement a “quality everywhere” approach and improve Agile and DevOps development and testing processes to improve the flow of work across the software delivery value stream. You can tightly align quality efforts from development to release, employ a broad range of tests anchored by automation, and continuously monitor and improve for increased throughput. OpenText fosters an open approach so that quality is visible, traceable, and continuously improved. By synchronizing quality and testing with Agile and DevOps processes, risks are mitigated early in the software delivery value stream – speeding the way for faster delivery and improved customer satisfaction.

    ALM Octane facilitates a tailored and scalable approach for large enterprises. You can deploy your way and minimize infrastructure needs with deployment options spanning on-premises, SaaS, and public cloud (Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure Marketplaces). Similarly, various licensing options can tailor the features to meet specific needs with support for thousands of concurrent users in geographically disperse locations.

    Sample Customers
    Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst
    Orange, Airbus, Haufe Group, Kellogg's, Claro, Bon Secours, World Wide Technology
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company38%
    Manufacturing Company23%
    Comms Service Provider15%
    Government8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Manufacturing Company22%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Government8%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider27%
    Financial Services Firm27%
    Transportation Company19%
    Consumer Goods Company4%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm28%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Government9%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise58%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise76%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise3%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise79%
    Buyer's Guide
    IBM Rational ALM vs. OpenText ALM Octane
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational ALM vs. OpenText ALM Octane and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Rational ALM is ranked 10th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews while OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 7th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 38 reviews. IBM Rational ALM is rated 7.2, while OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Rational ALM writes "A complex deployment that is not stable, but is cloud-based". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". IBM Rational ALM is most compared with Jira, Codebeamer, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Polarion ALM and PTC Integrity, whereas OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and GitLab. See our IBM Rational ALM vs. OpenText ALM Octane report.

    See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.

    We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.