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."The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is the alignment of the test to the execution and the linking of the defects to the two. It automatically links any issues you have to the test."
"It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent."
"It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level."
"The API to support integration of the homemade automated testing tool."
"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."
"The ability to time test runs gives the tester the ability to compare calculated times to actual times it takes for a test case to run."
"The most valuable features are the reporting in the dashboard and the general way in which we can create test runs is helpful."
"I use the product to create test cases and share them with my team and manager."
"The integration with Jira and the ability for extra configurations are the most valuable features."
"You don't need to follow complex procedures to create a test run, test case, etc."
"The solution is very stable. We've never had any issues with it."
"The performance could be faster."
"Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time."
"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."
"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."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."
"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."
"Better prediction of text."
"The product is not focused on synthetic data creation. I would also like to see more integrations with other platforms."
"The reports should be more user-friendly."
"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."
"I do see room for lots of improvement in it. In terms of usability, duplication with test cases and constant creation of projects isn't easy. There is also too much API integration into automation tools, which is not there in ALM with UFT. Instead of setting it up as a project and using it, we set it up as a system for usability. It also lacks in the traceability aspect. For traceability, you need to use the JIRA plugin and drag traceability on JIRA, but the functionality is still quite limited. The biggest gap is mainframe testing. It would be good if I could start with mainframe testing. Manual granting of access is another issue. There is no API that I could use with another system where it is automated. There is an API for loading somebody to a project but not for adding to the application."
"The TestRail API to integrate reporting of automated tests is complete, but requires many requests to identify the appropriate entry."
"The platform needs improvement regarding performance and creating links."
"The test suite management has room for improvement as well as better reporting."
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, Tricentis qTest, TFS, 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.