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

Helix ALM vs IBM DOORS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
9.5
Helix ALM's customer service is praised for being responsive, knowledgeable, and efficient, aiding users with excellent support and onboarding.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
7.0
Users find Helix ALM slow, unintuitive, with limited reporting, poor integration, and inadequate documentation.
No sentiment score available
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Helix ALM is praised for its scalability, integration, and stable performance, making it ideal for large, growing teams and projects.
No sentiment score available
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
Helix ALM provides scalable, flexible pricing with per-user costs based on modules, and discounts for higher user counts.
No sentiment score available
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
9.0
Helix ALM is praised for its robust performance, reliability, and high responsiveness, especially during complex tasks and updates.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.2
Helix ALM excels in managing requirements, tracking issues, and test management with flexibility, customization, robust traceability, and integration capabilities.
No sentiment score available
 

Categories and Ranking

Helix ALM
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
7th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.2
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (18th), Test Management Tools (14th)
IBM DOORS
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of Helix ALM is 4.6%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM DOORS is 34.7%, up from 34.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

Harold Pogue - PeerSpot reviewer
Helix ALM is insanely configurable, with great traceability, and flexibility
The most valuable features of Helix ALM are traceability and flexibility. One thing that distinguishes Helix ALM from other solutions is that it is a hybrid cloud model. Helix ALM is not a full cloud implementation like Valerian, Jira Jama, or Atlassian, where we just go through a browser onto the cloud. In the case of Helix, we have code that goes on our computer and then that communicates to the cloud. We have the backup and distribution capability of the cloud, but we have code executing on our machine, and we don't need to worry much about speed and internet lag problems.
MarioCataldi - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool
The biggest improvement for me is definitely the ability to use DOORS in a web environment through Rational DOORS Next Generation. Integrating with Rational Team Concert via the web interface has also been beneficial. However, not all Rational Team Concert operations are available from the web client. Certain operations, like creating streams or components, still require using the desktop application. They're not accessible through the web interface. And in my opinion, this limitation should be removed. Creating streams, components, etc. We still need the desktop app for those. DOORS has enabled flexibility in mapping requirements to the software. Tracking changes over time due to team meetings and other factors is important. Additionally, I've been using DOORS Next Generation, the web-based tool, especially in the last year.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
25%
Computer Software Company
13%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Helix ALM?
I rate the product price a nine on a one to ten scale, where one is low price and ten is high price.
What needs improvement with Helix ALM?
Helix ALM should be able to integrate with other systems better. Helix ALM should also have an easier user interface, and the solution needs to have drag-and-drop tools included in it.
What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS?
The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?
The price of IBM DOORS depends upon the pricing models and the licenses the user selects. The product, on average, starts at $134/month. IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS?
IBM DOORS effectively synchronizes with Polarion. But suppose when Polarion is running on Linux and you want to integrate with IBM DOORS on Windows, that is when compatibility issues arise. For the...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

TestTrack
Rational DOORS
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Invision, Softing, CACI, Hunter Industries, ITSO, Itron, EEC, Database Consultants Australia, VirtualScopics, March Networks, WorkForce
Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
Find out what your peers are saying about Helix ALM vs. IBM DOORS and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.