We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and OpenText ALM / Quality Center 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."CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful."
"The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"It is a stable solution."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance."
"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"As a stand-alone test management tool, it's a good tool."
"With test execution, you have an option to create custom fields. It is also really user-friendly. With other tools, we only have restricted fields and we cannot customize or add new columns or fields that users can make use of while testing. ALM is very flexible for creating new fields. It is easy for users to understand the application."
"It has a good response time."
"The independent view of elevated access is good."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"Certain areas in Codebeamer could be improved, like addressing small issues, glitches, or bugs."
"During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks."
"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"The product's UI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."
"As soon as it's available on-premises we want to move to ALM Octane as it's mainly web based, has the capability to work with major tests, and integrates with Jenkins for continuous integration."
"The uploading of test scripts can get a little cumbersome and that is a very sensitive task. They could improve on that a lot. It's really important that this gets better as I'm loading close to a thousand test scripts per cycle."
"Currently, what's missing in the solution is the ability for users to see the ongoing scenarios and the status of those scenarios versus the requirements. As for the management tools, they also need to be improved so users can have a better idea of what's going on in just one look, so they can manage testing activities better."
"We would like to have support for agile development."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should improve the reports. Reporting on tax execution progress against the plan. However, they might have improved over two years since I have used the solution."
"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. 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 OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira and Parasoft Development Testing Platform, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise. See our Codebeamer vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center 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.
