Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Atlassian ALM vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 23, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
4.9
Atlassian ALM's customer service is efficient and responsive, effectively addressing user concerns despite some plugin unavailability.
Sentiment score
5.9
IBM ELM support is helpful but needs faster responses and simpler processes; additional self-service resources are recommended.
 

Scalability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
7.4
IBM ELM's scalability varies; seamless for some, challenging for others, requiring knowledge and affected by licensing and stability issues.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.7
Atlassian ALM receives mixed stability feedback due to performance issues, sluggish navigation, and challenges in achieving high availability.
Sentiment score
6.7
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management is generally seen as stable, though impressions vary based on different product experiences.
 

Room For Improvement

Atlassian ALM needs improved user management, integration, configurability, reporting, and high-level planning for a better user experience.
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management requires enhanced reporting, user interface, integration, customization, stability, and improved user guidance and documentation.
 

Setup Cost

IBM ELM is seen as costly, yet its long-term value ensures strong user retention despite underutilized features.
 

Valuable Features

Atlassian ALM enhances project management through flexible integration with JIRA, Confluence, and Bitbucket, supporting efficient team collaboration.
IBM ELM offers customizable planning, integration with Git, compliance features, and cost-effective cloud-based SaaS solutions for lifecycle management.
 

Categories and Ranking

Atlassian ALM
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
19th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Engineering Lifecycle M...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
13th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Atlassian ALM is 1.2%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 2.7%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

ZX
Scrum board feature is highly valuable and handles different user volumes
We have both small-sized and big-sized customers. The small ones generally have around 50 to 200 users. The larger ones, for example, in China, have around 15,000 platform users. So, the number of small companies is high, but the total business value comes from the big companies. Atlassian ALM can handle different user volumes. For customers with more than 500 users, we recommend deploying a high availability (HA) architecture. The solution supports both single-node and HA modes. I would rate the scalability a five out of ten. It could be better in terms of scalability with more users. It could be improved to better handle larger numbers of users. We have clients using Atlassian ALM both in China and globally. We have around 20 clients using this solution.
Harold Pogue - PeerSpot reviewer
A complex deployment that is not stable, but is cloud-based
The team of 15 to 20 software engineers uses IBM Rational ALM and Jira for testing. They coupled different online packages together because the Duration Enterprise was impossible to use IBM Rational ALM did not help the organization and we ended up moving to another solution. The most valuable…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
824,106 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
22%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Atlassian ALM?
The most valuable feature is the Scrum board.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Atlassian ALM?
The pricing is on the higher side. I would give it an eight out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high.
What needs improvement with Atlassian ALM?
There is room for improvement in the high-level project management. In future releases, I would like to have a planning feature for high-level project management.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational ALM?
The user interface requires significant improvement as it is overly complex. For business users with no experience in IT, it can be particularly challenging to understand the UI and create test cas...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational ALM?
We use IBM Rational ALM as part of our overall application suite for our manufacturing company. It is used by our engineering team to capture requirements, perform testing, and manage defects. Spec...
 

Also Known As

No data available
IBM Engineering Rhapsody, Rational ALM, MKS
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Facebook, NASA, Cisco, eBay, Redfin, Toyota, Kaiser Permanente, Gilt, CSIRO, Autodesk, The Daily Telegraph, CODE, Illumnia
Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian ALM vs. IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,106 professionals have used our research since 2012.