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

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
8.4
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer boosts efficiency, reduces costs and defects, accelerates delivery, and integrates seamlessly, improving ROI and productivity.
Sentiment score
6.8
OpenText ALM boosts testing efficiency, improving management visibility, cost savings, traceability, and mapping test cases to requirements.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
8.4
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer's support team is knowledgeable, professional, and efficient, though response times may slow during peak hours.
Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText ALM/Quality Center's customer service varies, with effective high-level support but delays and mixed expertise at lower levels.
Technical support has been excellent.
Quality is always high yet not perfect.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer scales well, supports complex workflows, integrates with tools, and offers flexible customization for diverse environments.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText ALM Quality Center is praised for scalability, handling many users well, though licensing and resources can be restrictive.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is reliable and robust, effectively handling requirements with minor bugs and consistent positive feedback.
Sentiment score
7.2
Users find OpenText ALM stable, with occasional lags under heavy load, but overall high reliability and uptime with proper setup.
 

Room For Improvement

Users suggest Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer needs better integration, enhanced documentation, increased customization, improved performance, and collaboration features.
OpenText ALM faces high costs, complex interface, limited browser compatibility, and lacks flexible integration with Agile processes and tools.
Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.
I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the market.
HPLM has one of the best UIs compared to other test management tools, allowing for efficient navigation between test pieces, test folders, test suites, and test execution.
 

Setup Cost

<p>Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer provides affordable, robust test case automation with customizable pricing, enhancing efficiency and reducing operational costs.</p>
OpenText ALM/Quality Center's high pricing necessitates strategic financial planning, with costs varying by deployment, user volume, and licensing.
 

Valuable Features

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is praised for its rigorous testing, automation, integration, and user-friendly drag-and-drop visual modeling.
OpenText ALM / Quality Center offers robust traceability, integration, and scalability for managing manual and automated testing efficiently.
The integration with internal applications and CollabNet is made possible through exposed APIs, allowing necessary integrations.
It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results.
We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered.
 

Categories and Ranking

Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Application Requirements Management (8th), Test Design Automation (1st)
OpenText ALM / Quality Center
Ranking in Test Management Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 3.0%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText ALM / Quality Center is 12.3%, down from 12.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Gireesh Subramonian - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps the development team to finish tasks within the required timeframe
The team I am working with was never into Agile before. We have a daily scrum-call and before that, we have to define all the tasks that we are going to work on for a number of sprints. For example, there is a Product Increment Planning meeting where we put all the user requirements into the product backlog. Then we put them back to the respective sprints. A product increment consists of about five iterations, or five sprints. And we pull each of these backlog items to these particular sprints or iterations, so that it is easy for the development team to pick up, based on the priority. The backlog is set, and it is pulled into particular sprints, based on business priority. So it helps the development team to take up and finish tasks within the required timeframe. It helps in productivity, traceability, and saves time.
Paul Grossman - PeerSpot reviewer
Range of supported technology expands, but odd IDE design still leave newbies and pro users alike disappointed.
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. While I have a larger list of issues that make day to day work harder than it needs to be, these are the Top Five that I do wish would capture someone's attention in upcoming releases. All hit the tool's ROI pretty hard. #1) Jump To Source - The Silent Code Killer: In older QTP versions a double-click on any function in the Toolbox window would take the developer to the function's source code, while a drag from the Toolbox would add it to the code window. Since 12.0 a double-click on a function in UFT's Toolbox window now ADDS the function (same as drag) to the Code window - to whatever random location the cursor happens to be at - even if it is off screen, and it will replace sections of code if it is highlighted. We are not sure what the intention was, but our Best Practice is to avoid the Toolbox window entirely to avoid the real danger of losing days of work and needless bug hunts. Now Jump to Source is not all bad. A right-click on any function called from a Script takes us to the code source, which is great! But it only half works: in a Library, only for functions declared within the same library. Our advance designs have well over twelve libs so a whole lot of extra time is spent searching the entire project for a function's source on a daily basis. Lastly, while we can add custom methods to object, a Jump To Source from these methods is long overdue. So again our only option is to search the entire project. #2) Object Spy: It needs to have multiple instances so that you can compare multiple object properties side-by-side. It lacks a Refresh button, so that automation engineers can quickly identify the property changes of visible and invisible objects. Or HP could skip to option #3... #3) Add RegEx integer support for .Height or .Width object properties when retrieving object collections. If this were possible, our framework could return collections that contain only visible objects that have a .height property greater that zero. (Side Note: the .Visible property has not returned a False value for us in nearly five years - a recent developer decision, not a product issue) Eliminating the need to separate the non-visible objects from visible ones would decrease execution time dramatically. (Another side note: Our experiments to RegEx integer-based .Height properties found that we could get a collection of just invisible objects. Exactly the opposite of what we needed.) #4) The shortcut to a treasure trove of sample code in the latest release 14.0 has been inexplicably removed. This impeeds new users from having an easy time learning the tool's advanced capability. In fact the only users daring enough to go find it now will be you who is reading this review. #5) Forced Return to Script Code. This again is a no-brainer design flaw. Let's say we run a script and throw an error somewhere deep in our function library. Hey it happens. In prior QTP versions when the Stop button would be clicked the tool would leave you right there at the point where the error occurred to fix. Now in recent releases, UFT always takes us back to the main Script, far from that code area that needed immediate attention.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Energy/Utilities Company
25%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
68%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs.
What needs improvement with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework.
What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
We work with Jira now, and there are some very good workflows. There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval. I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the mar...
 

Also Known As

Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Williams, Rabobank
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.