We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Visual Studio Test Professional 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."Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"So the first impression that hits me about HP UFT 14.0 (formerly QTP) is that it seems to be a whole lot faster! But that could be subjective, as I'm running it on a high end gaming system."
"The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs."
"You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this. It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product."
"What's most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is that it's useful for these activities: test designing, test planning, and test execution."
"It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations."
"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."
"As a system administrator, HPE ALM can be flexibly configured so that it can accommodate a variety of defined project lifecycles and test methodologies."
"The solution is very useful for compiling existing projects and developing new projects."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a scalable solution."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a very scalable solution."
"The setup is easy and straightforward."
"The documentation is easy, and it helps us solve our problems."
"The most valuable features are tools like IntelliSense and ReSharper."
"Its initial setup process is easy."
"It's great for the development of .NET."
"ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
"HPE ALM’s out-of-the-box reporting can be perceived as rigid and limited, to an extent."
"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."
"The uploading of test scripts can get a little cumbersome and that is a very sensitive task. They could improve on that a lot. It's really important that this gets better as I'm loading close to a thousand test scripts per cycle."
"When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects."
"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"It would be great to support other languages and applications, and that is one of the things we can improve."
"The interface should be made attractive."
"The database administration could be better; you should be able to choose new tools with the development environment in Visual Studio. It could be easier to use."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a little pricey."
"The performance could be faster."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"The product must provide more integration."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 5th in Test Management Tools with 46 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT One. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Visual Studio Test Professional 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.