OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs PractiTest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OpenText Logo
8,832 views|3,763 comparisons
90% willing to recommend
PractiTest Logo
250 views|189 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and PractiTest 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 OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. PractiTest Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,649 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 product can scale.""It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations.""It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with.""I found the ease of use most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Creating test cases is easier because the solution allows writing in Excel.""It has a good response time.""I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects.""Having used the tool before, I like the use of parameters, being able to do exports and reports of the data for monitoring of executions, and the defect management as well. I feel satisfaction in that area.""Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pros →

"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."

More PractiTest Pros →

Cons
"I'm looking at more towards something more from a DevOps perspective. For example, how to pull the DevOps ecosystem into the Micro Focus ALM.""Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas""Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way.""We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus.""I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable.""It is not a scalable solution.""When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects.""It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Cons →

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."

More PractiTest Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
  • "If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
  • "For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
  • "The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."
  • "HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
  • "Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
  • "Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
  • "I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
  • More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
  • More PractiTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:HP ALM and Jira can be easily integrated with the aid of a third-party Integration Solution To help you select the right integration approach and tool, you should first define your integration… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.
    Top Answer:It was expensive for us. For the first two weeks, we had to employ people now and then as the system needed to be more accurate. It cost us a lot of money. I rate the solution's pricing as a seven or… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    Views
    8,832
    Comparisons
    3,763
    Reviews
    16
    Average Words per Review
    429
    Rating
    7.4
    Views
    250
    Comparisons
    189
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    Learn More
    Overview
    OpenText ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps you govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.

    Manage your QA and Testing process, controlling your testing tasks while getting complete visibility into your results, and most importantly releasing your products in a professional way

    Professional end to end QA management for your manual and automation testing. 
    • Create your manual tests and organize them based on cycles, sprints, etc.
    • Seamlessly integrate your manual testing with your automation and CI processes.
    • Reuse tests and correlate results across different releases and products.
    • Release your products with confidence and control.


    Sample Customers
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Insurance Company9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization55%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Computer Software Company5%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise58%
    Large Enterprise35%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business29%
    Midsize Enterprise57%
    Large Enterprise14%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise7%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. PractiTest
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. PractiTest and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while PractiTest is ranked 20th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while PractiTest is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PractiTest writes "Offers one click graphical dashboard reports and advanced customization". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas PractiTest is most compared with TestRail, Jira, Zephyr Enterprise and Microsoft Azure DevOps. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. PractiTest report.

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