We performed a comparison between Jira and Planview Daptiv based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The timeline management is great."
"We can create multiple boards for the same product backlogs."
"In general, the GUI is nice."
"The most valuable features are the customized Dashboard, Sprint Planning, and Automatic Notifications."
"In Jira, the integrations I have used so far are the repository integration, like when it gets added, or the integration with Confluence, which is good."
"JQL, JIRA Query Language enables me to filter all the issues, display the items as I want."
"Offers a common language set so we can bring people into projects and get them up and running almost immediately."
"The board has been a very valuable feature because it can be very simple for teams that are not technical. It can also be highly technical and have lots of data for teams that are technical. So we use it for both instances."
"The powerful collaboration is definitely the most valuable and the fact that you can adjust flexibility to almost any methodology, and the easy creation of complete new functionalities without programming code."
"It's difficult to pinpoint just one most valuable feature, as there are many features that can be beneficial. For the specific use case of my client's project management office, they found the project management features of the application to be particularly valuable, such as project boards, reporting, and the ability to customize views. Additionally, task management and project scheduling were also highly utilized. However, capacity planning was not used as much as the others, as there was a lack of support from executives to invest in training and implementing it due to a lack of processes in place. The project planning features, dashboard, and reporting capabilities were considered the most valuable."
"I like the reporting engine, IBM Cognos, especially the analytics. That's a good tool. It's quite strong on the ideation and capacity-planning side, which is a huge plus."
"Changepoint gives us a view of the project status and needs very clearly, which are things that we used to miss with MS Project and Excel."
"The timekeeping features are great and very helpful."
"There are some minor quirks, such as zero-point stories not appearing in the portfolio scope."
"Some of the customizations are definitely a little challenging."
"We'd like to see more collaboration tools implemented within the product itself."
"I wish the whole workflow process was easier to set up. You put the requirements in and then you send it to the developer. They get a notification. Then they go into Jira."
"I don't know whether there is a Jira problem or a test risk problem, however, sometimes, we face issues on fetching the reports."
"Ease of administration and customization. It is really clunky in this area."
"The solution could improve by having its own tool for quality lifecycle management."
"The tool lacks support for testing aspects, which means we often rely on integrations with other tools for testing purposes. If Jira could incorporate testing modules within its platform, it would eliminate the need for external integrations."
"Expense management, simulation scenarios, and budget control could be great and useful features to include."
"I find the solution has an excessive amount of features. Many aren't even kept current. Some aren't useful at all. There's an overall lack of coherence within the solution. It can make the execution difficult. Many features can easily be eliminated and it would help streamline the solution. They should get rid of 80% of the features and then really focus on the leftover 20% to make it a really great product."
"The areas that should be improved in Planview Daptiv are a subject that can be viewed differently depending on who you ask. I feel they should focus on excelling in one specific area rather than providing average capabilities in many areas. For example, their project planning software is satisfactory but not as advanced as Microsoft Projects. The same goes for the capacity planning tool and reporting capabilities, which can be improved upon by using custom Excel spreadsheets or by hiring a business analyst for additional support. In short, the biggest weakness of Daptiv is that it does not excel in any one area and only provides average performance."
"It would also be nice to see some improvements on the IBM Cognos Analytics. There's still work to be done on the analytics side of things, like your condition formality."
"This solution needs more standard connectors to other solutions."
Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews while Planview Daptiv is ranked 12th in Project Portfolio Management with 12 reviews. Jira is rated 8.2, while Planview Daptiv is rated 8.2. 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 Planview Daptiv writes "Useful project management capabilities, beneficial dashboards, but project planning could improve". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Polarion ALM, whereas Planview Daptiv is most compared with Broadcom Clarity . See our Jira vs. Planview Daptiv report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors and best Project Management Software vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio 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.