Compare Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
510,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it.""The program is very stable and scalable.""You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."

More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Pros »

"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation.""We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone.""The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable.""The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements.""It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched.""Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape.""I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent.""I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pros »

Cons
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes.""Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."

More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Cons »

"We would like to have support for agile development.""The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system.""ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers.""There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky.""One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers.""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.""Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time.""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."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."

More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Compared to the market, the price is high.""Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive.""It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective.""Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license.""The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license.""Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment.""I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required.""Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
510,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: The licensing model is an area that can be improved. The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap. To the best of my recollection, it is… more »
Top Answer: We are having a lot of problems with this solution. One example is that users are able to run test cases, but the permissions are managed by another group. I don't have the ability to create test… more »
Ranking
10th
Views
1,648
Comparisons
1,262
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
544
Rating
7.7
1st
Views
19,156
Comparisons
11,953
Reviews
24
Average Words per Review
1,072
Rating
7.5
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
Learn More
Overview

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is the full, featured, enterprise ready test management solution directly in Jira. It offers full traceability across issues, requirements, test cases, and execution. The tool allows for flexibility and customisation for test plans and runs. It offers a free and flexible REST API, includes the ability to automate bulk tests, and enables seamless integration with most continuous integration tools. The in-depth reporting capability gives users the ability to analyse and share test data results between development and business teams. It’s the single source of truth to track, manage and optimise your whole test lifecycle right inside Jira software.

Try it now https://marketplace.atlassian....

See the overview video

Benefits:

  • Drive reusability across Jira with cross-project hierarchical repositories for all test assets 
  • Improve collaboration with flexible workflows between traditional and Agile development teams
  • Enhance coverage with end-to-end traceability across all test artifacts
  • Eliminate duplication to increase efficiency with versioning, test data parameters and shared step features
  • Improve visibility and functionality with 70 cross-project reports and gadgets
  • Reduce management time and effort, with rich APIs for integration with test automation and DevOps tools
  • Allows teams to seamlessly collaborate and manage multiple versions of test cases in parallel while providing an audit history of changes

Features:

  • Easy drag and drop organisation, planning and execution 
  • Hierarchical folders to manage and reuse assets across Jira projects, releases and sprints
  • Test case libraries including versioning, shared steps and test data parameters
  • Test plans and runs to manage and track test execution cycles
  • Full traceability of test cases, requirements, test execution results and defects
  • 70 cross-project reports, gadgets and Confluence Macros to track the coverage of your tests with advanced cross project reporting
  • Global and project level settings for customisation and standardisation
  • Custom fields for test cases, test steps, test plans and test runs
  • Migration function to import test cases from files or legacy test management tools
  • REST APIs for integration with test automation and DevOp tools

Use Cases:

  • Integrate CI tools such as Jenkins, Bamboo, Travis CI or other development applications like Github, Bitbucket, Datadog via the REST API for end-to-end integration across test case management, execution, and reporting
  • Automate testing at scale, whilst maintaining traceability inside Jira. Scaled to 10,000+ tests across multiple configurations, publishing results in Jira in under 30 minutes
  • Increase efficiency by significantly reducing time spent on test case specification and management
  • Benefit from reusability across Jira projects and single points of maintenance when reusing and organizing test cases
  • Improved visibility of software testing process and quality with 70 out-of-the-box reports, including real-time dashboards
  • Clear end-to-end traceability of requirements, tests, and defects ensuring that the delivered software meets requirements.














Micro Focus Application Lifecycle Management software (ALM), is a unified platform that helps teams prioritize, align and focus their project activities, provides actionable insight, and fosters the re-use of assets from requirements through development, testing, and readiness for delivery. 

Built on best practices, an extensible architecture and centralized repository, Micro Focus ALM is one of the first unified, technology-agnostic application management systems available now; integrating out-of-the-box with over 30 open source and competitive industry products.

Micro Focus’s ALM suite provides flexible solutions and deployment options to meet your needs and scale with you as you grow.

Offer
Learn more about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira
Learn more about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center
Sample Customers
IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear,  Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient
Specsavers, Cardinal Health, KMD, Turkcell
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider21%
Computer Software Company20%
Financial Services Firm18%
Manufacturing Company6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Comms Service Provider13%
Healthcare Company10%
Insurance Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company35%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm9%
Government5%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise72%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business7%
Midsize Enterprise17%
Large Enterprise76%
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
510,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is ranked 10th in Test Management Tools with 3 reviews while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 24 reviews. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is rated 7.6, while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira writes "A good repository for test cases, but query capability should be integrated". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center writes "Makes it easy to go back and execute the same test every time with automation". Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, TestRail by Gurock, TFS, Tricentis qTest and Visual Studio Test Professional, whereas Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Tricentis qTest and TFS. See our Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center report.

See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Management Tools 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.