Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Polarion Requirements comparison

"Integration with automation is one of the reasons we started to consider moving to this tool from our original tool for implementing test modeling. ARD appears to have better integration with Selenium. It also has the ability to record scripts/flows using Selenium Builder and import them into ARD, which will then create and optimize a model based on that."

"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."

"Integration with TDM, test data management tool, provides the ability to generate data or use identified (preset or parametrized) test data. It allows significant expansion of test coverage and flexibility, without creating new tests and needing to maintain them."

"The modeling is a game-changer."

"The ability to create models/diagrams at multiple levels (nest/embed them) helps in taking models from high-level business requirements and building them into detailed requirements models and test models. Plus, it helps reuse lower level models. It also allows maintaining models at appropriate levels, even for very complex systems/solutions."

"Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered."

"​The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."

"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."

"We worked with the web interface."

"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."

"I like the way this solution is structured."

"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."

"We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for automotive industries. There is an open API for integration with Jira as well, so for me, customization is a strong point."

"In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps."

"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."

"The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now."

"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."

"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."

"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."

"The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."

"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."

"The solution could improve security and authentication."

"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."

"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."

"Integration can be a little tricky if you're not aware of basic computer science or programming language."

"Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature."

"The usability of the solution should also be improved."

"The platform's review process for the documents could be better."

"It is not a stable solution, as we had issues with shared licenses."

"In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily understandable for end-users."

"Polarion Requirement needs to have a feature where we can track changes and compare documents. Currently, we do it manually."

"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."

"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."

"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."

"​The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."

"At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves. Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."

"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."

"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."

"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."

"The pricing model is flexible. You don't have to pay for the full functionalities. And it's a one-time investment for the licenses. You purchase what you need and then can work with that."

"I believe the cost is subjective. It seems a bit pricey, but it depends on your perspective. To provide some context, I compared the prices with GitLab and Jira. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Jira's prices. However, GitLab costs around 40 euros, and DeepLab, which I recently discovered, also falls in a similar price range. I'm not sure about DeepLab's features or interface improvements, as they might have been implementing requirements management over the past six months. In contrast, Polarion costs around 50 to 60 euros based on the 2021 prices I have. While it may seem a bit expensive, it's worth considering whether the additional investment, perhaps around 68 euros per user, is justified. It might appear costly at first glance, but it's essential to acknowledge that it can greatly streamline your work processes."

"The product's price is high."

"Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."

"It is expensive but not for what it is. It is just the right price for what it is. Its price is also similar to other solutions."