We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and Jira 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."You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"Since implementing this solution we have better communication and information exchange with customers."
"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 platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"I like that all of the team members on an agile team can use it. No one is in a separate application."
"It gave us control over all test artifacts in one place, along with easy traceability, mapping between stories, bugs, test cases, and test cycles."
"The most valuable feature of Jira for sprint planning is the timeline feature, which allows for better visualization and planning of releases."
"Jira is flexible and accessible for the end-user. It lets users track their requests. The look and feel are good for our purposes."
"I can use Jira Query Language (JQL) to write queries to see the stories that are there for the current sprint. I can also sort them by assignment. I also use Jira is for burndown charts, which give an indication of how efficiently the squad is performing. I also use the Active Sprints function and a feature called Planning Poker."
"Workflow administration is an easy process, especially with respect to defects."
"The most valuable feature is its flexibility."
"The most valuable feature is managing software development."
"During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks."
"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."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now."
"Certain areas in Codebeamer could be improved, like addressing small issues, glitches, or bugs."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"We'd like to use it with non-Agile projects in the future, however, right now, it is a very Agile-focused product."
"We would like to see the integration of a lite-version of Confluence, just to manage some of the templates and documents."
"They can maybe dumb down the directions for building the automation a little bit because to be able to build out the automation, I had to play around with it and learn what all the fields meant and what they were referencing. I don't have an IT background originally. My background is in biology, and I got into project management by chance. I am good at it, but I haven't really worked with coding languages. In terms of writing automation, it is easier for devs because they intuitively know what they're being asked, but as a PM who originally didn't have IT experience, it was a little bit daunting at first. It could also have an extra hierarchy to be able to allow tasks under stories. It could be the way it is set up at our organization, but currently, under stories, you can have sub-tasks, but you can't create a task. Being able to customize your hierarchy a little bit more would be beneficial because sometimes, the devs would say, "Well, here's a story, and now we need sub-tasks," but as we were building out the sub-tasks, sometimes we had to go a step lower to dig in a little bit more, and we couldn't do that."
"I am not sure if Jira can be integrated with our ERP. We have our ERP for the cost estimates or measurements. It would be nice if we can check or view a plan with the real cost. Currently, we have to do a double check of costs. It would be better to be able to integrate it with Jira."
"Its UI can be improved a little bit. I know this a business tool and not a commercial tool, but it could be a little bit more interactive like the HP ALM/Quality Center, which provides you the results of graphs and gives you a lot of visual representations. I feel Jira lacks a little bit in this aspect."
"While it's very powerful, it's very complex sometimes."
"Out-of-the-box reporting is limited. It would be helpful if more customisation was possible."
"Lacks some common building block approaches to certain things."
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while Jira is rated 8.2. 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 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". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational ALM and IBM Engineering Workflow Management, whereas Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Planisware. See our Codebeamer vs. Jira 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.
