We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and TestRail based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"We are able to use Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for test management, defect management, test process, test governance activities, and requirement management. We are able to achieve all of this, the solution is very useful."
"ALM is a well-known product and is one of the pioneers in providing test management facilities with a 360 degree view of requirements."
"Integration with other HPE products."
"Having used the tool before, I like the use of parameters, being able to do exports and reports of the data for monitoring of executions, and the defect management as well. I feel satisfaction in that area."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"The integration with UFT is nice."
"This is a user friendly solution."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the dashboard."
"The integration with Jira and the ability for extra configurations are the most valuable features."
"From a testing perspective, the management is awesome. I am able to do testing and then add the reporting and the evidence. It is fair in terms of the price that you're paying. You get what you're paying for."
"I haven't faced any stability issues using the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility, ease of use for writing new test cases, the test plans, and the composition."
"The most valuable features are the reporting in the dashboard and the general way in which we can create test runs is helpful."
"The product helps us create test cases and reports."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should improve the reports. Reporting on tax execution progress against the plan. However, they might have improved over two years since I have used the solution."
"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."
"The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard."
"Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. E.g., they have always stated that, "You can monitor and create requirements," but it has its limitations. That's why companies will choose another requirements management solution and import data from that source system into Quality Center. Micro Focus has also invested in an adapter between Dimensions RM and ALM via Micro Focus Connect. However, I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool. I feel what Micro Focus did is say, "Our strategy is not to improve these parts within the tool itself, but search for supported integrations within our own tool set." This has not been helpful."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"Reporting could be more flexible regarding repeating reports."
"It would be nice to have a description section when creating the test scenario itself so I can indicate what the configuration should be."
"Their customer support could be improved. Sometimes we struggle with that. It could be faster. Whenever we raise any query, they get back to you but the turnaround time is very slow."
"It would be nice if they would add an export to Word."
"There are a number of improvements that have been requested. While I don't have a list of these requests available, many can be found on Gurock's forum."
"The test suite management has room for improvement as well as better reporting."
"The platform needs improvement regarding performance and creating links."
"TestRail's user interface is not great. When you use it for the first time, you will be very uncomfortable and not know how to create test cases. It doesn't have a field for preconditions and post-conditions."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews while TestRail is ranked 3rd in Test Management Tools with 21 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while TestRail is rated 8.0. 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, the top reviewer of TestRail writes "A tool that provides effective test management and real-time reporting capabilities". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Polarion ALM, whereas TestRail is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, TFS, Tricentis qTest, Tricentis Tosca and QMetry Test Management. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. TestRail report.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management 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.
