Compare GitLab vs. IBM Engineering Workflow Management

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab vs. IBM Engineering Workflow Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
441,850 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
"The dashboard and interface make it easy to use.""We like that we can create branches and then the branches can be reviewed and you can mesh those branches back. You can independently work with your own branch, you don't need to really control the core of other people.""Everything is easy to configure and easy to work with.""A user friendly solution.""It speeds up our development, it's faster, safer, and more convenient."

More GitLab Pros »

"All of the features work together to provide a powerful holistic solution - from the dashboard all the way through to security.""Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."

More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pros »

Cons
"GitLab doesn't have AWS integration. It would be better to have integration with other container management environments beyond Kubernetes. It has very good integration with Kubernetes, but it doesn't have good integration with, for example, AWS, ETS, etc.""I would like to see static analysis also embedded in GitLab. That would also help us. If there's something that it does internally by GitLab and then that is already tied up with your pipeline and then it can tell you that you're coding is good or your code is not great. Based on that, it would pass or fail. That should be streamlined. I would think that would help to a greater extent, in terms of having one solution rather than depending on multiple vendors.""The only thing our company is really waiting on in terms of features is the development of metrics.""Reporting could be improved.""I would like to see better integration with project management tools such as Jira."

More GitLab Cons »

"Some administrative tasks are difficult to perform. These could be simplified.""Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."

More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"I think that we pay approximately $100 USD per month."

More GitLab Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Licensing: The solution cost is high and should be brought down to increase competition.""It's an expensive investment to make, so the decision should be driven on individual requirements."

More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Agile Planning Tools solutions are best for your needs.
441,850 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
5,575
Comparisons
4,884
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
503
Avg. Rating
8.7
Views
3,789
Comparisons
2,706
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
519
Avg. Rating
7.0
Popular Comparisons
Compared 27% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Also Known As
IBM Rational Team Concert (IBM ALM), IBM RTC
Learn
GitLab
IBM
Overview

GitLab is a single application with features for the whole software development and operations (DevOps) lifecycle.

IBM Engineering Workflow Management manages plans, tasks, the project status and acts as the critical link between required and delivered work. It provides flexibility to adapt to any process, which enables companies to adopt faster release cycles and manage dependencies across both small and complex development projects. This solution offers no-charge server software and flexible pricing models. It becomes a complete IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management solution—when purchased as a set of seamlessly integrated tools: IBM Engineering Workflow Management, IBM Engineering Test Management, and IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next.

Offer
Learn more about GitLab
Learn more about IBM Engineering Workflow Management
Sample Customers
Siemens, University of Washington, Equinix, Paessler AG, CNCF, Ticketmaster, CERN, VaadinTelstra Corporation, Visteon, Atos SE, Panasonic Automotive Systems, IBM Global Technology Services, CareCore National, JTEKT Corp., ItaÒ BBA, Avea, CACEIS, Danske Bank Group, APIS IT
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider15%
Government7%
Media Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider14%
Manufacturing Company9%
Government9%
Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab vs. IBM Engineering Workflow Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
441,850 professionals have used our research since 2012.
GitLab is ranked 6th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 5 reviews while IBM Engineering Workflow Management is ranked 10th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 2 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while IBM Engineering Workflow Management is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Provides or mandates quantitative code into the Master". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Engineering Workflow Management writes "Gives us work distribution among team members, but teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Tekton, TeamCity, Bamboo and Harness, whereas IBM Engineering Workflow Management is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, CA Endevor Software Change Manager, Rally Software and TFS. See our GitLab vs. IBM Engineering Workflow Management report.

See our list of best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise Agile Planning 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.