We performed a comparison between Jira and Polarion Requirements based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Jira is easy to use and there are a lot of tools that are integrated with it."
"It is very straightforward and easy to use."
"The user interface is simple."
"Jira as a structure has Confluence for documentation, and for what it is offering it is a strong suit with Atlassian."
"I was able to do real-time reports myself without having to wait for data import."
"A most valuable feature involves the ability to customize the entries and to update them quickly."
"It is very configurable, and we can do whatever we want. Jira dashboards are also good, and we use them extensively. We also use the tracking mechanism extensively."
"I feel the strongest feature of Jira is its workflow engine. It helps us automate our workflows within our organization. It's the one characteristic of Jira which I think can help any organization, be it in any domain."
"I would say there is value in how powerful, configurable, and user-friendly it is."
"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."
"The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now."
"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."
"I like the way this solution is structured."
"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."
"My company mainly utilizes the product for documenting internal standards, guidelines, and requirements. Currently, we're focusing on using it for internal purposes, but the vision is to expand its usage to include contract requirements and tracking functionalities. While we're not there yet, it has proven effective for managing our internal documentation needs."
"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."
"The pricing is quite high."
"When we use the plugin in Jira so, there are two different systems which we are working on, Jira and the X-ray plugin. The X-ray plugin should be incorporated into Jira because we have to fetch two reports. One report is faxed through Jira, and one can be faxed through X-ray. So there needs to be clarity about which the Jira team should reflect."
"In Jira, say on the team, no matter the methodology, it doesn't matter what I'm practicing, if I am using the tool for a while and I've compiled some sort of history. If I want to change my workflow, say my team is today using to-do in progress done, and tomorrow, I decide I want to use to-do in review and done, and I apply that new workflow, I have just now effectively lost all of my histories in terms of reporting."
"The CACD solutions on JIRA has some plugins, but they are not easily understandable or workable."
"Lacks field-level permission in the cloud version."
"it would be helpful to have a better tutorial for learning and to have a better understanding of what the features are and what they do."
"Jira could improve by making the user interface easier to use and the functionality could be better. While we are managing multiple sprints and other elements of the projects, it's very difficult to manage the labels and other aspects."
"An area for improvement in Jira is that it's not designed for test management. To use it for test management, you need an add-on or several add-ons, e.g. Xray or Zephyr."
"Polarion Requirement needs to have a feature where we can track changes and compare documents. Currently, we do it manually."
"It is not a stable solution, as we had issues with shared licenses."
"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."
"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."
"The usability of the solution should also be improved."
"The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management."
"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."
"If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable."
Jira is ranked 2nd in Application Requirements Management with 266 reviews while Polarion Requirements is ranked 3rd in Application Requirements Management with 13 reviews. Jira is rated 8.2, while Polarion Requirements is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Jira writes "A great centralized tool that has a good agile framework and is useful for day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion Requirements writes "Defines, builds, tests and manages complex software systems". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Polarion ALM, whereas Polarion Requirements is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jama Connect, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Helix ALM. See our Jira vs. Polarion Requirements report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.