We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and Polarion ALM 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."Since implementing this solution we have better communication and information exchange with customers."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance."
"It is a stable solution."
"The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"We had a nice experience with technical support."
"The most valuable feature is the function of the ALM system."
"It meets with everybody's needs without having to grab plugins."
"Polarion ALM has some valuable tools for managing our targets and requirements. I think that's its best feature."
"The solution offers good integration."
"You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs."
"Scalability is good...The integration is quite good."
"The best feature of Polarion ALM to me is its traceability link."
"The product's UI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira 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."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"The solution needs to improve its user experience and graphics."
"The solution's editing capabilities need improvement."
"The ease-of-use could be improved a little."
"One of Polarion's shortcomings would be planning. It can handle plans, but the planning feature is very basic."
"The planning and task management aspects of the solution were not that easy."
"The tool needs to improve its planning. It also needs to add more integrations."
"The interface for this solution needs to be made more user-friendly to provide a better user experience."
"Test management lacks an automated process."
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while Polarion ALM is ranked 7th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while Polarion ALM is rated 7.6. 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 Polarion ALM writes "Though needing an improvement in reporting and time for extraction of the data, its integration capabilities are good". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, IBM Rational ALM and Jama Connect, whereas Polarion ALM is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, PTC Integrity, GitLab and Jama Connect. See our Codebeamer vs. Polarion ALM 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.
