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 solution's support team was always there to help."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"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."
"The AI and functionality interface are useful."
"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."
"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."
"The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable."
"It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations."
"The most valuable features are the reporting in the dashboard and the general way in which we can create test runs is helpful."
"I was on the lookout for automation testing on the browser and I believe this tool is very interesting in that matter. The solution is useful for UI testing. You just need to add the URL that is to be checked."
"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."
"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."
"Integration with Confluence and JIRA."
"This is a user friendly solution."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility, ease of use for writing new test cases, the test plans, and the composition."
"Certain applications within this solution are not really compatible with certain applications like ERP. The problem is when we're trying to use these applications or devices, the solution itself doesn't scale."
"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."
"Certain features are lousy. Those features can drag the whole server down. There are times that the complex SQL queries are not easy to do within this solution."
"ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers."
"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and 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."
"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."
"TestRail should improve its pricing."
"The platform needs improvement regarding performance and creating links."
"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."
"Better prediction of text."
"The product is not focused on synthetic data creation. I would also like to see more integrations with other platforms."
"This solution has room for improvement. For example, some particular projects need to adjust access or add additional members and this isn't always possible. Role-based access would improve this."
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.
