IBM DOORS vs Inflectra SpiraTest comparison

IBM and Inflectra are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. IBM is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1, while Inflectra is ranked #11 with an average rating of 7.0. IBM holds a 34.5% mindshare in ARM, compared to Inflectra’s 0.6% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 76% of Inflectra users who would recommend it.

IBM DOORS

Read 53 IBM DOORS reviews

8,366 Views
5,695 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

Inflectra SpiraTest

Read 25 Inflectra SpiraTest reviews

200 Views
112 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

IBM DOORS

Inflectra SpiraTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM DOORS and Inflectra SpiraTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,158 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

IBM DOORS

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Inflectra SpiraTest

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

11th

Average Rating

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Management Tools (17th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 34.5%, up from 34.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Inflectra SpiraTest is 0.6%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

MarioCataldi

Senior Consultant Bip - Business Integration Partners at Business Integration Partners

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.

Read full review

Jason Lopez

Test Manager at a engineering company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Intuitive enough and easy to learn, but in terms of folder organization, it could be better

Inflectra SpiraTest is the new kid on the block compared to Jira and Azure. Still, when I started exploring the tool, I realized that it was no different from other tools I've used in the past, but it all boils down to adaptability because the features would always be more or less the same. I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."

"It is very customizable and easy to scale."

"What I like about DOORS is baselines, it's easy and I use the capability of multiple users. The traceability or links between different levels are very nice. Additionally, it is used by all of our suppliers, which brings us commonality."

"We have different generations of all products. It lets us select and see unique attributes for each release or generation. You can use attributes to define a selection area to see which equipments are for the old versions and which ones are for the new versions. This inbuilt view is what I like in IBM Rational DOORS. So, for a database and a set of requirements, it will select and show unique attributes for a release or a generation."

"The shell scripting is the solution's most valuable aspect."

"The solution is stable."

"Compared to other tools that I have used over the past 20 years, DOORS is the best of the best."

"I would say that the best feature of the solution is that since everything is in one place, and if you make any changes, then they are recorded or tracked."

More IBM DOORS pros

"The reporting functionality helps vendors and technical resources identify bugs and issues that need to be addressed. The simple dashboard-style home page makes training end-user testers simple and straightforward. The actual testing UI is VERY straightforward and very intuitive for the end-users that test the system since very often we pull from business and operational users to help test new systems."

"The user-friendly features are the most valuable. For example, migration of requirements and migration of test cases and the creation of traceability. You have various reports that you need. The plug-ins that are available to connect with the other tools."

"Inflectra SpiraTest has a lot of functionality, which is good."

"I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it."

"We were able to add a step-by-step procedure for someone to follow to assist in testing."

"The features of this product most valuable to me were the test case management and the visual status, by which it was displayed."

"The ability to reuse test cases already used across projects is the most valuable feature of this solution. We don't need to create new ones."

Cons

"Enhancing security measures, particularly when handling multiple projects simultaneously, would be beneficial to prevent data loss within DOORS."

"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."

"Both the performance and the price could be improved."

"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now."

"I think there is probably room to improve by offering free training."

"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."

"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."

"It would be nice if it could be scaled-down so that it could be installed and implemented without much learning or training."

More IBM DOORS cons

"Two areas that can stand improvement: integration with third party products and making it more intuitive."

"It should develop integration with JIRA. We have some complexities which caused us not to decide to integrate it with our JIRA, like synchronous data."

"Migrating is not very easy. It depends on the organization, how efficient and effective the decision-making process is. The plug-ins should be easier and more integrated rather than the user trying to integrate the tools which are more popular, like Jira et al."

"The user interface is slightly complicated and not very consistent. It could be more user friendly."

"The UI for managing test cases, test sets, test runs could be a little more integrated, currently, these feel disjointed at times and confusing. Also, the test steps page needs to display the test steps closer to the top of the UI so as to not have to scroll down to find."

"The folder organization in Inflectra SpiraTest could be better, though I cannot comment whether that is structure-related. Most of what I need would probably be in the tool, but as a test manager, I need to be able to create dashboards and reports easily."

"Being able to add scripting for testing can and does save a lot of time. When you are able to just ‘run’ a test case rather than manually add it and run it."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think it's expensive because you have to pay for the licenses to IBM and all that and maintain them."

"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."

"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."

"The licensing cost is too high."

"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with one being very affordable and ten being quite expensive."

"We have to pay for a license. I think it's a one-time payment as my company hasn't notified me about more charges. I don't think it's expensive for large corporations, but it will be costly for an average person."

"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."

"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."

More IBM DOORS pricing and cost advice

"The pricing was excellent. I would recommend the enterprise solution."

"I Googled the pricing for Inflectra SpiraTest, and it's about $4,000 annually."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

26%

Computer Software Company

11%

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Government

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Inflectra SpiraTest?

I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Inflectra SpiraTest?

The folder organization in Inflectra SpiraTest could be better, though I cannot comment whether that is structure-related. Most of what I need would probably be in the tool, but as a test manager, ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Inflectra SpiraTest?

The use case for Inflectra SpiraTest is to report on defects. It's also useful for writing test cases.

See all answers

Comparisons

Jira vs IBM DOORS

Compared 27% of the time

Polarion Requirements vs IBM DOORS

Compared 26% of the time

Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS

Compared 18% of the time

IBM DOORS Next vs IBM DOORS

Compared 8% of the time

Helix ALM vs IBM DOORS

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM DOORS Competitors

No data available

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS

January 2025

Download IBM DOORS product report

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra SpiraTest

January 2025

Download Inflectra SpiraTest product report

Also Known As

Rational DOORS

SpiraTest, Spira

Learn More

IBM

Inflectra

Overview

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS (DOORS) is a Requirements Management (RM) software designed to help organizations manage engineering project requirements throughout the development lifecycle. It provides a central location for capturing, defining, and organizing project requirements, facilitating communication and collaboration among stakeholders like engineers, system designers, and customers. Key features include requirements traceability, version control, and impact analysis, ensuring effective implementation and testing. DOORS improves efficiency, enhances communication, reduces risks, and supports better decision-making through clear visibility into requirements. Compared to its newer, web-based counterpart DOORS Next, the mature DOORS 9 offers a wider range of features with a traditional user interface but lacks web-based functionality and modern integration with IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) tools.

SpiraTest is an integrated Requirements and Quality Management solution that manages your project's Requirements, Test Cases, Releases, Defects and Issues in one environment, with complete traceability throughout. After defining your project's requirements, you generate the test cases and test steps that validate the functionality. The test execution modules allows users to run through the tests, logging defects/issues as they go. SpiraTest is Fully Web-Based. Free 30-Day Trial.

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt

- Morningstar - Deutsch Bank - Sopra Group - Booz Allen & Hamilton - UBS - US Government

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest

January 2025

Free Report: IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest report.

See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.

We monitor all Application Requirements Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.