Compare Cognizant ADPART vs. IBM Rational Quality Manager

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Quotes From Members

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

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 most valuable feature is the RFT because it allows us to automate manual test cases.
Top Answer: Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition. As it is now, we cannot upload a set of test cases, and instead, have to create it manually. Being able to upload… more »
Top Answer: We are a consultancy and we use this solution to create a testing plan, that includes test cases, for our clients. It is part of a larger suite of tools that includes Rational Functional Tester, which… more »
Ranking
18th
Views
2,305
Comparisons
951
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
14th
Views
1,308
Comparisons
714
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
450
Rating
7.7
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
ADPART
Rational Quality Manager
Learn More
Overview

Cognizant ADPART is a Model-based testing product that enables organization get their products business ready 30% faster and ensure 100% quality coverage. 

ADPART lets users model business flows and automates test design eliminating the need for manual authoring of test cases. 

IBM Rational Quality Manager is a collaborative hub for business-driven software and systems quality across virtually any platform and type of testing. This software helps teams share information seamlessly, use automation to accelerate project schedules and report on metrics for informed release decisions. Rational Quality Manager helps quality assurance teams collaborate by sharing project information and status updates seamlessly so team members can synchronize teamwork throughout the lifecycle. It helps them automate by reducing labor-intensive activities to accelerate project schedules. In addition, it helps them govern by understanding and reporting on project metrics enabling accurate, reliable and timely release decisions.
Offer
Learn more about Cognizant ADPART
Learn more about IBM Rational Quality Manager
Sample Customers
Information Not Available
Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company40%
Energy/Utilities Company13%
Comms Service Provider12%
Media Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider18%
Manufacturing Company13%
Financial Services Firm8%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business13%
Midsize Enterprise38%
Large Enterprise50%
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Microsoft, Tricentis and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: June 2021.
510,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Cognizant ADPART is ranked 18th in Test Management Tools while IBM Rational Quality Manager is ranked 14th in Test Management Tools with 3 reviews. Cognizant ADPART is rated 0.0, while IBM Rational Quality Manager is rated 7.6. On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Rational Quality Manager writes "Has good integration with the other professional tools but usability needs improvement ". Cognizant ADPART is most compared with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer, Tricentis qTest, Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, Tricentis Tosca and TFS, whereas IBM Rational Quality Manager is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, TestRail by Gurock, Tricentis qTest, TFS and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira.

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.