We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and IBM Rational ALM 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."Since implementing this solution we have better communication and information exchange with customers."
"One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance."
"The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"The word emulation and importing is good."
"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."
"It's easy to use."
"You can customize the board according to your needs."
"The integration with Git works well."
"The planning feature is rich with Scrum concepts: Sprint, Sprint retrospective, the rules in the Scrum framework."
"The solution is customizable."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of the CPU usage on the dashboard."
"It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"The product's UI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"Certain areas in Codebeamer could be improved, like addressing small issues, glitches, or bugs."
"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved."
"The solution can improve in the development area and the customized applications."
"Some improvements to the user interface (UI) would be helpful, such as exposing more services to make it easier to customize to the needs of each customer."
"The stability of IBM Rational ALM could be improved."
"The product must be more user-friendly."
"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."
"IBM Rational ALM should remove the features not used by the customers and keep this product as lightweight as possible."
"There is not enough beginner support material in the form of FAQs or simple training to help you get started."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved."
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while IBM Rational ALM is ranked 10th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while IBM Rational ALM is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Codebeamer writes "Has good technical support services, but the migration process needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Rational ALM writes "A complex deployment that is not stable, but is cloud-based". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira and Jama Connect, whereas IBM Rational ALM is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Polarion ALM, PTC Integrity and Atlassian ALM. See our Codebeamer vs. IBM Rational ALM 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.
