Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and OpenText ALM / Quality Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 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
"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field.""Integration with automation is one of the reasons we started to consider moving to this tool from our original tool for implementing test modeling. ARD appears to have better integration with Selenium. It also has the ability to record scripts/flows using Selenium Builder and import them into ARD, which will then create and optimize a model based on that.""The support that we get from Broadcom is great.""The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage.""It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes.""Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered.""Helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model.""CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Pros →

"It is stable and reliable.""By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level.""Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects.""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.""As a stand-alone test management tool, it's a good tool.""You can do your development from start to finish: starting with the requirements, ending with defects, and testing in-between.""Defect management is very good.""ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pros →

Cons
"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework.""Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around.""Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script.""At present, there is no option for test data parameters from ARD for virtual databases. We have to create them in TDM and push them as well. Virtual database connectivity needs to be improved. They need to come up with some areas where they can create synthetic data parameters easily from the test cases that have been designed.""Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test.""CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now.""The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them.""The solution could improve security and authentication."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Cons →

"Client-side ActiveX with patch upgrades""It needs Pure-FTPd WebUI and single sign-on.""Lacks sufficient plug-ins.""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.""Micro Focus is an expensive tool.""HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist.""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.""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."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "​The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."
  • "We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."
  • "This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."
  • "It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."
  • "Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."
  • "At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves. Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."
  • "The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."
  • More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer 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 →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases.
    Top Answer:The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs.
    Top Answer:Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework.
    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 »
    Ranking
    11th
    Views
    437
    Comparisons
    198
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    363
    Rating
    8.0
    1st
    Views
    3,859
    Comparisons
    1,683
    Reviews
    17
    Average Words per Review
    424
    Rating
    7.4
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    Learn More
    Overview
    CA Agile Requirements Designer is an end-to-end requirements gathering, test automation and test case design tool which drastically reduces manual testing effort and enables organizations to deliver quality software to market earlier and at less cost. The optimal set of manual or automated tests can be derived automatically from requirements modeled as unambiguous flowcharts and are linked to the right data and expected results. These tests are updated automatically when the requirements change, allowing organizations to deliver quality software which reflects changing user needs.
    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.
    Sample Customers
    Williams, Rabobank
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm43%
    Comms Service Provider21%
    Energy/Utilities Company14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Energy/Utilities Company17%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Computer Software Company10%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Insurance Company9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization53%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Computer Software Company6%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business9%
    Large Enterprise91%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise75%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise57%
    Large Enterprise37%
    Buyer's Guide
    Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is ranked 11th in Test Management Tools with 20 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is rated 7.8, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer writes "Easy to use, beneficial test case visibility, and effective support". 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 ". Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Jira, Adaptavist Test Management for Jira, TFS and Sealights, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise. See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText 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.