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

Codebeamer vs OpenText Software Delivery Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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
6.0
Codebeamer delivers reduced workloads and effort, simplifying certification, but may challenge Machine Learning Ops integration during AUTOSPICE implementations.
Sentiment score
6.9
OpenText Software Delivery Management promises cost efficiency, reduced resource needs, and enhanced project management with automation and predictive analytics.
ROI can manifest through cost savings and increased development speed.
The solution has produced a return on investment.
Codebeamer saves time and money for certain use cases, such as AUTOSPICE implementations.
The ability to generate audit evidence with a single click saves ten days of work for ten people, enabling them to focus on other tasks.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.3
Users find Codebeamer's support transparent and responsive, though some desire hotline chat and Chinese documentation for complex issues.
Sentiment score
7.4
OpenText Software Delivery Management provides efficient support with active customer engagement, though some users desire faster communication improvements.
If I raise an issue as high priority, I receive responses in six to eight hours.
For out-of-the-box support, the customer service from PTC is satisfactory.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.8
Codebeamer is highly scalable across platforms, supports growth well, but could improve documentation for new users.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText Software Delivery Management is scalable and efficient, supporting large teams and numerous users with minimal performance issues.
In a project, I have experienced up to 180 licenses running during peak times and as low as ten licenses during downtime without facing upgrade or downgrade issues.
It should come with documentation that is accessible for users, especially for newcomers who might not have any prior knowledge.
On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the scalability of Codebeamer as eight or nine because it is a highly scalable solution.
We can expand the number of servers and resources as required.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
Codebeamer is stable with occasional glitches and compatibility issues, but generally reliable with scalability improving on larger servers.
Sentiment score
7.9
OpenText Software Delivery Management is praised for its stability, reliable functionality, supportive services, and high user satisfaction scores.
From a scale of one to ten, I would rate the stability of Codebeamer as eight to nine because the solution is highly stable.
Running it independently or with a bigger server generally doesn't cause any issues.
There were stability issues due to version compatibility.
 

Room For Improvement

Codebeamer requires usability enhancements, better integration, improved design, language support, customization, and streamlined documentation for various industries.
OpenText Software Delivery Management needs testing and integration enhancements, better usability, performance, and flexible features for improved functionality.
There should be more integration tools available.
Older versions of PDM Windchill face compatibility issues with newer versions of Codebeamer, requiring users to downgrade Codebeamer to establish integration.
If terminology changes, modifications must be done manually or by exporting the document to Word or Excel, which is time-consuming.
While it aims to be as flexible as possible for a large enterprise application, sometimes there are limitations that may not meet specific organizational needs.
 

Setup Cost

Codebeamer is moderately priced, offering valuable features and scalability, satisfying users with its balance of cost and functionality.
OpenText Software Delivery Management is costly but offers comprehensive features and scalability, potentially offsetting its high initial price.
Codebeamer is on the expensive side, but it provides ready-made modules for standards like ASPICE and ISO 26262, which might justify the cost for customers looking for those solutions.
Codebeamer is fairly priced against competition.
OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product.
 

Valuable Features

Codebeamer offers full traceability, customizable templates, seamless integrations, and excels in regulatory compliance and industry-specific modules.
OpenText Software Delivery Management excels in Agile support, integrations, traceability, analytics, and adaptability for streamlined project management.
Its integration capability is very high, with almost eighty to eighty-five percent of integrations available readily out of the box, minimizing the need for specific integration-related work.
Codebeamer saves on time and resources with its web-based client, eliminating the need to install it on every system.
The requirements management aspect of Codebeamer is critical because it helps various industries, such as automotive or medical devices, to capture requirements based on industry-specific standards and processes.
Its ability to generate audit evidence with a single click is a significant advantage, as it saves considerable time and money compared to manual processes.
 

Categories and Ranking

Codebeamer
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Software Delivery ...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Codebeamer is 8.9%, up from 6.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Software Delivery Management is 5.1%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Codebeamer8.9%
OpenText Software Delivery Management5.1%
Other86.0%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

SHRINIVAS ALAGERI - PeerSpot reviewer
Built-in project management modules simplify processes while compatibility improvements are needed
Codebeamer could improve its customization capabilities and integration options. For instance, older versions of PDM Windchill face compatibility issues with newer versions of Codebeamer, requiring users to downgrade Codebeamer to establish integration. The installation on Linux can be tricky, and backward compatibility needs enhancement. Also, Codebeamer struggles with some DevOps integrations and lacks AI features for enhanced user assistance.
GeorgNauerz - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable tool for sprint planning, test management, quality management, and automated testing
I think the area of release management in the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required. In general, the connection between releases and scrum teams needs improvement, as it could be optimized owing to its linkages, making it very uncomfortable as soon as you have strong teams or scrum teams that work with different items over several releases. In future product releases, the solution needs to focus a bit more on the metric part. The product's dashboard is a metric for productivity and process control.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
31%
Computer Software Company
14%
Healthcare Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise32
 

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?
Codebeamer is fairly priced against competition. Customers prefer it due to its pricing, scalability, features, functionality, and integration with multiple tools. On a scale of one to ten, I would...
What needs improvement with codeBeamer ALM?
I would like to improve the speed of Codebeamer, and what I believe is lacking is a way to define or set up role-specific user interfaces. Codebeamer is a very powerful tool, but the experienced us...
Is Jira better or would you go with Micro Focus ALM Octane?
Hi Netanya, Basically , it all depends on the use cases for your environment and the business needs. Hope the below data may be relevant to you for identifying your needs and deciding on the approp...
What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Octane?
The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Octane?
OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product. However, it offsets costs by saving time and money, thus creating a balance between expenses and benefits. Our organization with over 1500 users sees sa...
 

Also Known As

codeBeamer ALM
Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Medtronic, Align Technology, Daimler, Samsung, Harman, Dassault
Orange, Airbus, Haufe Group, Kellogg's, Claro, Bon Secours, World Wide Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Codebeamer vs. OpenText Software Delivery Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.