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."We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."
"The solution's support team was always there to help."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a very good test management tool especially for writing test cases and uploading. You can even upload the test cycles from Excel. You get the defects and the reports, and also some automation using EFT which works with ALM."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"This is a user friendly solution."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the UI. The structure of test cases is easy to understand."
"The integration with Jira and the ability for extra configurations are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features of TestRail by Gurock are the user experience, it's very easy to learn. There is no learning curve needed to work on projects and manage the test cases, it is easy. Exporting and importing are simple."
"Integration with Confluence and JIRA."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that there are various test case templates and test artifact maintenance."
"The product helps us create test cases and reports."
"I haven't faced any stability issues using the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed."
"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."
"HPE ALM’s out-of-the-box reporting can be perceived as rigid and limited, to an extent."
"It is pricey."
"One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers."
"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."
"There's room for improvement in the requirements traceability with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. That could use an uplift."
"As soon as it's available on-premises we want to move to ALM Octane as it's mainly web based, has the capability to work with major tests, and integrates with Jenkins for continuous integration."
"TestRail should improve its pricing."
"With TestRail, the APIs are there, but they may not be able to easily integrate with the Jenkins."
"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."
"The reports should be more user-friendly."
"I have faced some issues with the integration between TestRail and Jira, which haven't been permanently resolved yet."
"The platform needs improvement regarding performance and creating links."
"It's not easy to create a custom report. It's not straightforward. A good improvement would be if there was a way to report and create a custom report without using a plugin or scripting language."
"It would be useful if it had its own issue management system. At the moment, it's purely a test management tool and you have to link to a defect management tool, like JIRA. It would be useful if there was an option to use its own defect management tool so that it's integrated and not two separate tools."
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.
