We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM Octane and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Agile Planning Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."People really how easy it is to customize. In some previous tools, that has been very limited, or you had to know how to write code to do some of the customizations, or it was very confusing. Going back to the user interface, they've made the customization of the tool, the workspace settings, very easy for people to figure out and use."
"The filtering options are very good once you learn them. The document reports are also valuable. You can create reports in Word and PDF formats. That's very useful."
"The dashboards and metric reporting are valuable features."
"The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ability to manage test scenarios, test results, and test automation, which are its primary functionalities."
"The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services."
"Backlog management is the most valuable feature. This was a capability that was missing or difficult to achieve in ALM Quality Center."
"On the user side, what I like a lot is the reporting capabilities. There's no tool, to my knowledge, that gets anywhere close to Octane at the moment when it comes to the reporting capabilities. I can do everything with the reporting. There's nothing missing. I have all the options. I can create graphs, including graphs of several types and looks."
"It's a very complete solution."
"As a product, the primary reason we like it is it gets integrated with our ITSM solution so that we don't have to go for an external product for project management like Jira."
"The interface is user-friendly. It's one of the most user-friendly on the market, and the most complete."
"The product is quite convenient and user-friendly."
"The solution offers a lot of opportunities for integrations. We can integrate with Slack, Azure, all the API alternatives, etc. There's a lot of integration modules provided."
"The feature I find the most valuable is the one that lets you see how much time has been used in processing a ticket. This allows us to better monitor performance."
"ServiceNow brings to the market different layers with different pricing, so you can customize. And all the layers are really enterprise-ready."
"The PPM module is an excellent service."
"I would like to see the mobile testing improved so that we can simply select a mobile device, then specify what parameters we want, and the testing will be run based on that."
"It could use just some small improvements. I would like additional features, like planning features, user story mapping, or connection to collaboration tools."
"Because JIRA is a leading tool for both development and requirements management - everybody is using JIRA - I'm pretty there will be a use case where people are trying to connect between ALM Octane and JIRA. The back-end configuration of the synchronization with JIRA could be simplified. The architecture is really complicated. We required a lot of machines to build the cluster and the configuration was not really clearly described within the documentation. This may have something to do with the fact that the software is pretty new."
"The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality."
"Security and security management, meaning the integration of the security, could be enhanced. We know about Fortify, but it would be better to have security features in the original Octane platform without the need for another solution or another application."
"Currently, Micro Focus ALM Octane is considered an old-world tool in the industry and lacks the perception of being a new-age tool among its customers."
"Though Micro Focus ALM Octane doesn't have much of a bug, it lacks integration with some solutions. For example, my company has fairly new software, but it can't be integrated with Micro Focus ALM Octane, so integration with other software, particularly with less popular software, could be improved. Micro Focus ALM Octane also requires a lot of resources during its setup, and I find this another area for improvement. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the ability to customize the interface, especially when doing a manual test."
"Globally, I don't see many major points of improvement. It's mostly plenty of little things, and it's weird to me that they are not in the product yet. They are really details, but they're annoying details... Today, in the tool, we've got plenty of assets we can handle, like requirements, user storage, defects, tasks and so on. And to all of those elements, we can add comments. We can add comments to any asset in Octane but not to tasks. It's just impossible to understand why it's not available for the tasks because it's available everywhere else. Similarly, for attachments, you can attach files absolutely everywhere except on automated runs, which is, again, awkward. I don't understand why on this element, in particular, you cannot do it. It's little touches like that."
"When we originally set it up, we had some kind of success manager free of charge, and now it's an additional charge over and above what we're paying."
"The only issue for us is the pricing. It’s quite high in comparison with the competition."
"The timing reporting module, and how it's used is a bit difficult to understand. Everything related to project management is quite extensive. It needs to be simplified. At first, our users didn't want to use it, because it seems a bit complex."
"The price keeps going up, and to remain competitive, it needs to have a competitive edge. I would like to see more of the latest innovations, in terms of AI, ML, and all of the latest cutting-edge technologies, included in the platform."
"The setup is a bit complex. It depends on the organizational needs, and sometimes, we make customizations based on those needs."
"The product comes with little options out of the box."
"Dashboard interface is limited functionally and not very user friendly"
"The cost could be improved. The solution is quite pricey."
More ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 6th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 38 reviews while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is ranked 5th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 26 reviews. OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2, while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management writes "A very strategic demand management tool that visualizes risks and ratings in a bubble chart". OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and IBM Rational ALM, whereas ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Jira Align, Microsoft Project Server and Smartsheet. See our OpenText ALM Octane vs. ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio 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.