We performed a comparison between Jira and Rally Software 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."JIRA's technical support is absolutely fantabulous. I had used it in the past when I was working at my previous organization. And when we wanted to link it with a framework, they helped us out with the API we were looking for."
"I've never had a bug or a bug message that I needed to open a ticket for."
"Reporting: It gives a nice report of my backlog and what my team has currently spent its efforts on."
"The solution has been very stable overall."
"Jira has been a good l tool for collaborating across large groups of people. The JQL feature is powerful and easy to use."
"It also works well with all the integrated tools that you buy."
"The initial setup isn't too complicated."
"When we run the Jenkins pipeline, the build is already automatically connected to Jira. We've been able to integrate the ecosystem we created using this automation tool."
"It documents stories in a way where we do not have to be heavy on front-end requirements, front-end documentation, and front-end workflows."
"Gives me a dashboard where I can see what things are not being worked on, what things are blocked."
"The most valuable feature is actually creating a field within there for architectural review. So when teams are struggling or have questions on the architecture or strategy that they take, they can actually flag that particular story, release, or project. Those can then be reviewed by the architecture team and the teams actually get additional information on how to course-correct, build on the architecture that we're trying to build throughout the organization, and get over road blocks much quicker."
"The transparency it allows us to provide, both from the team level all the way through the executive level within the company and the work that we are doing."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Kanban board."
"The Defect feature. In one view you can see all your defects and you can push them into the different releases."
"The metrics - collecting metrics. It's because we've used several other tools in the past, and they don't give you a full indication of how well your teams are performing, at a portfolio level, at a product level, and at the team level."
"It's a good platform to keep track of all the user stories across all projects. So rather than having one off Excel spreadsheets with all of the requirements, it is a good place to have all of that."
"Slow when integrating with other components."
"The solution could be more user-friendly."
"The way to configure it can definitely be improved. It is very difficult and complex to configure. Its configuration should be simplified."
"What could be improved is the migration between the testing and production environments. This could be automated somehow as the manual transfer of certain workflows and functionalities is very time consuming right now."
"There are a limited number of gadgets accessible in Jira; thus, additional ones should be supported."
"My main concern is the administration of projects, especially user groups, and this requires root access rights but there is no concept of layered admin rights."
"In Jira, say on the team, no matter the methodology, it doesn't matter what I'm practicing, if I am using the tool for a while and I've compiled some sort of history. If I want to change my workflow, say my team is today using to-do in progress done, and tomorrow, I decide I want to use to-do in review and done, and I apply that new workflow, I have just now effectively lost all of my histories in terms of reporting."
"The sprint-related graphics need to be improved."
"We'd like better dashboards to make visibility better."
"I would like to see more Kanban support. As it stands, it doesn't seem to have the features or the layouts that the teams really need to be able to execute their tasks. It almost tries to force you into more of a Scrum style."
"There are few customisation options. For instance, the workflow for story cards cannot be changed out of the box from the standard (Defined, In-Progress, Completed and Accepted)."
"I think there is a missing link with the development activity. Some developers are pushing in new versions of the code, but you cannot make the link from the user story to a specific application version."
"I think the interface could be a little bit more visual and less wordy. Right now, it seems like it's just a lot of text on the page. In other ticketing systems where it's more visual, you can see more of a flow. But in this one it's more just a list of tasks. I would like to see that a little bit better, especially considering it has so many great organizational features, like child tasks, different artifacts. It would be great to see it presented more appropriately."
"One problem I see is that if there is a dependent user story - for example, if my team is working on one thing and there is a dependent user story from another team - we can have a dependency created but we don't know if there is a change of status from the other team. That is something which is very important for Agile Central to look into so that if the other team makes any changes we will be notified as well."
"We want Rally to generate OKRs, to allow teams to record the OKRs, and then the OKRs can be mapped to the epics and there is organizational alignment."
"What I don't like about it is that it is really hard to find old work to reference information and use the reporting section of the application in terms of trying to analyze trends. If I am trying to find out which interfaces took this long and I want to compare and measure improvement from one quarter to another quarter, the reporting mechanism within Rally is very troublesome. They have an Excel plugin that you're supposed to use, but you literally have to pull the raw data out before you can do the analysis. You can't do it within Rally, and if you can, it is a secret, and I don't know how to do it. It should have better, easier, and user-friendly reporting without having to use the Excel add-in. It is very clunky. There is a lot of data in there, but it is not organized in such a way that makes it intuitive. You really have to kind of look for where do you put your documentation or dates. Some customization is available, but it is not plug-and-play like Jira. When I switched from TFS to Jira, I just went and started using Jira, whereas with Rally, you kind of have to really get in and figure out what you need to do before you set stuff up, or you're going to get yourself stuck. You can just start using Jira and be successful."
Jira is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews while Rally Software is ranked 8th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 7 reviews. Jira is rated 8.0, while Rally Software is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Jira writes "Stable with good documentation and needs very little maintenance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rally Software writes "Good discussion and note-taking capabilities but hard to track the changes". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Polarion ALM and TFS, whereas Rally Software is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, TFS, Jira Align, OpenText ALM / Quality Center and OpenText ALM Octane. See our Jira vs. Rally Software 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.