We performed a comparison between Jira and Polarion Requirements based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Jira's collaborative features, such as comments, notifications, and real-time updates, facilitate better communication."
"Perfect for keeping track of large amounts of bugs, tasks queries and releases for fixes."
"We can create multiple boards for the same product backlogs."
"Has a good dashboard with good tracking features."
"We have not encountered difficulties with the scalability."
"The configurable workflows and boards make it easy for us to execute and oversee our own unique process."
"The way we can define and customize the search queries for the tickets in Jira is most valuable."
"This is a user friendly solution."
"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."
"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."
"A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization."
"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."
"I like the way this solution is structured."
"My company mainly utilizes the product for documenting internal standards, guidelines, and requirements. Currently, we're focusing on using it for internal purposes, but the vision is to expand its usage to include contract requirements and tracking functionalities. While we're not there yet, it has proven effective for managing our internal documentation needs."
"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."
"The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now."
"It should have Behavior Driven Development (BDD). There should be an option to add macros to help with that. A lot of people are using it now, and it would be nice if there was a way in there to be able to generate the BDD of commands whenever you're creating a story."
"The reporting needs to be improved."
"While it's very powerful, it's very complex sometimes."
"If CI/CD is integrated with it, it would be better. I've used Azure DevOps before, and it's nice to have everything, such as CI/CD Repos and other things, integrated. Jira has fewer integrations. Azure DevOps has an easier interface, and it has got everything in one spot. I don't have to jump around in different applications."
"For me, the solution is too complicated as it has too many features. It would be nice if they could streamline things."
"Jira has recently updated their UI, but more can be done to make it even better."
"In Jira Cloud, integration with Excel is missing. Previously, I could import our Excel files into Jira, and I could also download a big Jira report in the Excel format, but now, it needs to be manipulated after that, which is not good. It looks like they've done that on purpose, but I don't understand the reason for it."
"Lacks some common building block approaches to certain things."
"Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature."
"Integration can be a little tricky if you're not aware of basic computer science or programming language."
"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear."
"We encountered numerous challenges, such as issues with requirements, project management, timing, and planning. The main problem with Polarion at the outset, I believe, was our limited understanding of the planning phase. During that time, we were more focused on change management related to requirements. Recognizing the importance of planning has been a key realization for us. Another mistake we made was not comprehending the need to document these requirements to manage all the work items effectively. Now, we understand the significance of this documentation. As a result of these insights, we have started to see a growing number of competitors from Polarion in this field. One potential improvement could be enabling Polarion to export work items not just to Microsoft Office but also to other office tools."
"If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable."
"The usability of the solution should also be improved."
"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."
"It is stable enough but if you would like to work with more requirement objects, then you will get timeouts."
Jira is ranked 2nd in Application Requirements Management with 243 reviews while Polarion Requirements is ranked 3rd in Application Requirements Management with 11 reviews. Jira is rated 8.0, while Polarion Requirements is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Jira writes "A great centralized tool that has a good agile framework and is useful for day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion Requirements writes "Defines, builds, tests and manages complex software systems". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Polarion ALM and Rally Software, whereas Polarion Requirements is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jama Connect, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Helix ALM. See our Jira vs. Polarion Requirements report.
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.