OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Semmle QL comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Semmle QL based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites.
To learn more, read our detailed Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 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
  • "I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
  • "If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
  • "For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
  • "The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."
  • "HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
  • "Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
  • "Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
  • "I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
  • More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:HP ALM and Jira can be easily integrated with the aid of a third-party Integration Solution To help you select the right integration approach and tool, you should first define your integration… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.
    Top Answer:It was expensive for us. For the first two weeks, we had to employ people now and then as the system needed to be more accurate. It cost us a lot of money. I rate the solution's pricing as a seven or… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    Views
    9,202
    Comparisons
    3,969
    Reviews
    17
    Average Words per Review
    424
    Rating
    7.4
    Views
    335
    Comparisons
    286
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    Learn More
    Semmle
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    OpenText ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps you govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.

    Our mission is to help everyone involved in software engineering create secure and trustworthy code without slowing down.

    Combining the fields of databases, programming languages, data science and security we're making the world’s software truly searchable, so that even deep meaningful questions about security can be answered, helping software organizations better understand their code, engineering processes and people.

    Sample Customers
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Murex, Trafigura, Dell, Dropbox, Nordea, Citi, Credit Suisse
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Insurance Company9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization53%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Computer Software Company6%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Government10%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise56%
    Large Enterprise37%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise73%
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Semmle QL is ranked 38th in Application Security Tools. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Semmle QL is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Semmle QL is most compared with SonarQube, Polyspace Code Prover, Fortify on Demand and Checkmarx.

    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.