Goda Case SPEC vs Polarion Requirements comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Goda Logo
45 views|25 comparisons
Siemens Logo
3,713 views|3,011 comparisons
83% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Goda Case SPEC and Polarion Requirements based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Atlassian, Siemens and others in Application Requirements Management.
To learn more, read our detailed Application Requirements Management Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,578 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:
Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "It is expensive but not for what it is. It is just the right price for what it is. Its price is also similar to other solutions."
  • "Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."
  • "The product's price is high."
  • "I believe the cost is subjective. It seems a bit pricey, but it depends on your perspective. To provide some context, I compared the prices with GitLab and Jira. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Jira's prices. However, GitLab costs around 40 euros, and DeepLab, which I recently discovered, also falls in a similar price range. I'm not sure about DeepLab's features or interface improvements, as they might have been implementing requirements management over the past six months. In contrast, Polarion costs around 50 to 60 euros based on the 2021 prices I have. While it may seem a bit expensive, it's worth considering whether the additional investment, perhaps around 68 euros per user, is justified. It might appear costly at first glance, but it's essential to acknowledge that it can greatly streamline your work processes."
  • "The pricing model is flexible. You don't have to pay for the full functionalities. And it's a one-time investment for the licenses. You purchase what you need and then can work with that."
  • More Polarion Requirements Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for… more »
    Top Answer:The pricing is in the middle-of-the-road. So, I would rate the pricing a five out of ten. They offer different license types based on user roles. For example, a manager who only needs to review things… more »
    Top Answer:At the product level, they are constantly improving things in the latest versions. The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management. Also, for requirement tracing, some… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    45
    Comparisons
    25
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Views
    3,713
    Comparisons
    3,011
    Reviews
    7
    Average Words per Review
    331
    Rating
    7.9
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Case SPEC, Analyst Pro
    Learn More
    Goda
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    Advanced requirements, test cases and life cycle management software. Items (requirements, test scripts, etc.) can be arranged in multilevel hierarchies and linked in any arbitrary fashion to other items, files (documents, code fragments etc) or diagrams. Full graphical and tabular traceability is provided with drill-down to lower levels. A change in an object such as a User Requirement automatically flags directly and indirectly linked objects such as test steps as suspect, to be re-evaluated.
    Polarion REQUIREMENTS is designed from the ground for highly effective, transparent and secure collaboration, while teams have the option to work in their familiar environments.
    Sample Customers
    Cytonome Inc, Accenture, Cherokee Information Services, The Arborsys Group
    NetSuite, Ottobock, Zumtobel Group, Kªster Automotive GmbH, Sirona Dental Systems, LifeWatch, U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), PHOENIX CONTACT Electronics GmbH, Metso Corporation
    Top Industries
    No Data Available
    REVIEWERS
    Manufacturing Company29%
    Transportation Company29%
    Hospitality Company14%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Manufacturing Company27%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Healthcare Company7%
    Educational Organization5%
    Company Size
    No Data Available
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business46%
    Midsize Enterprise23%
    Large Enterprise31%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Requirements Management
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Atlassian, Siemens and others in Application Requirements Management. Updated: March 2024.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Goda Case SPEC is ranked 15th in Application Requirements Management while Polarion Requirements is ranked 3rd in Application Requirements Management with 12 reviews. Goda Case SPEC is rated 0.0, while Polarion Requirements is rated 7.4. On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion Requirements writes "Defines, builds, tests and manages complex software systems". Goda Case SPEC is most compared with , whereas Polarion Requirements is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jama Connect, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Helix ALM.

    See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.

    We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.