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

Codebeamer vs IBM Rational ALM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Codebeamer
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
10th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Rational ALM
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
13th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Codebeamer is 7.4%, up from 4.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Rational ALM is 2.5%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

Gaurav Kandurwar - PeerSpot reviewer
Has good technical support services, but the migration process needs improvement
In my current company, we previously used multiple tools for requirement management, test management, and tracking, such as Arvines, a hardware list for test management, and Jira for tracking purposes. However, these tools were part of a segregated environment, and management decided to upgrade them due to their outdated functionalities. Consequently, my team and I evaluated various tools for requirement management and chose CodeBeamer for its flexibility. We found it is more adaptable to our organization's needs and processes, making it a suitable choice for our migration efforts. During the evaluation process, we considered features compatibility with our business processes and flexibility to accommodate changes. This aspect was crucial to minimizing adjustment time and ensuring a smooth transition to the new tool.
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…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a stable solution."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"Codebeamer is user-friendly"
"The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful."
"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."
"The word emulation and importing is good."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of the CPU usage on the dashboard."
"We have something called the GC (global configuration), which is a unique feature compared to any other competitor we have in the ALM space."
"I would rate the stability of this product a nine out of ten."
"The cataloging is a very valuable feature. For a lot of enterprises, they end up not knowing which applications do specific features. The cataloging helps with this. It's not that verbose, but it still gives you allowances to put in more detail."
"It's easy to use."
"The solution is customizable."
 

Cons

"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved."
"Codebeamer is not completely compatible with our internal network setup."
"During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks."
"The product's UI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now."
"One of the complaints from users is that they have to click buttons too many times for just a simple task. Changing this would lead to a better user experience."
"Some improvements to the user interface (UI) would be helpful, such as exposing more services to make it easier to customize to the needs of each customer."
"There is not enough beginner support material in the form of FAQs or simple training to help you get started."
"The directory designer manager is uncivil. The design manager is clearly really unstable."
"The features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate."
"The stability of IBM Rational ALM could be improved."
"The user interface requires significant improvement as it is overly complex."
"The GUI is a little bit outdated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They're not the most expensive product on the market, but they're not the cheapest either — I'd say codeBeamer ALM is moderately priced."
"It is reasonably priced and in accordance with the industry standards."
"Codebeamer is not a cheap solution."
"Pricing is good when compared to similar ALM solutions."
"This product is a little expensive and we had to pay extra to have them set it up for us."
"We have a contract, but I am not aware of the details."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. Many of our customers are not using all the features and this could be why our clients feel the price is too high."
"The solution is not cheap."
"IBM Rational ALM has both monthly and yearly licensing options."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
31%
Computer Software Company
15%
Healthcare Company
8%
Transportation Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
24%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about codeBeamer ALM?
The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for codeBeamer ALM?
As I am not involved in purchasing the product, it is difficult for me to comment on the product's pricing model.
What needs improvement with codeBeamer ALM?
Codebeamer is not completely compatible with our internal network setup, which could be improved.
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

codeBeamer ALM
Rational ALM, MKS
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Medtronic, Align Technology, Daimler, Samsung, Harman, Dassault
Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst
Find out what your peers are saying about Codebeamer vs. IBM Rational ALM and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.