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

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

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 Engineering Lifecycle M...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
13th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 3.9%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 4.6%, 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 (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management4.6%
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)3.9%
Other91.5%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

Juergen Albrecht - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH
Combining tools for effective data analysis while customization and integration need improvement
The most valuable feature is how IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) allows me to present to the customer what the actual software, even hardware, will do. It helps them gain an impression of the complexity of the functionality and find an easier way to decide whether to implement it. A picture says more than one thousand words, which is why I work with the combination of ELM and the specification of DOORS. The automation capabilities I built use column-based scripts for analysis to search, fetch, and transfer information. When I open modules, it automatically analyzes the changes since the last opening by me.
GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."
"It is relatively easy to use and user-friendly once the setup is complete."
"Everyone in a team can work on the same platform and share the same information."
"It's easy to use."
"IBM Rational ALM is a very good tool. I like the management and traceability features and the test management tool. The latter is not linked with the stories and fixed management. It is really useful, and we can create test plans. We can also test some metrics related to QA."
"The word emulation and importing is good."
"The solution is customizable."
"The transition to a SaaS-based solution is a distinct advantage."
"Being able to manage tests as this is something very difficult to find in other products."
"Integration with other HPE products."
"The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs."
"The solution's support team was always there to help."
"By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level."
"The AI and functionality interface are useful."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
 

Cons

"The GUI is a little bit outdated."
"The user interface requires significant improvement as it is overly complex."
"There is not enough beginner support material in the form of FAQs or simple training to help you get started."
"The solution can improve in the development area and the customized applications."
"I would like to see better reporting features. The out-of-box reporting is - I don't want to say limited - but the focus is on the Scrum and Sprint reports. We need more reporting features regarding the history of the work, tracking it more deeply."
"The directory designer manager is uncivil. The design manager is clearly really unstable."
"In the next release, we expect a traceability metrics configuration where we can configure the user stories. We also expect them to improve or simplify the query process."
"I think nowadays people are getting into Jira and other tools. What is happening is, this solution is becoming more traditional, whereas Jira and other tools are more attractive for the new users to learn and start using because of the graphical interfaces."
"We operate in Sweden, and there are not so many Swedish people that know the product."
"I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."
"The UFT tests don't work very well and it seems to depend on things as simple as the screen resolution on a machine that I've moved to."
"Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time."
"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."
"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system."
"I would rate it a 10 if it had the template functionality on the web side, had better interfaces between other applications, so that we didn't have dual data entry or have to set up our own migrations."
"Is not very user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"IBM Rational ALM has both monthly and yearly licensing options."
"This product is a little expensive and we had to pay extra to have them set it up for us."
"The solution is not cheap."
"We have a contract, but I am not aware of the details."
"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"The pricing is expensive nowadays."
"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."
"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."
"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."
"Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
880,315 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Government
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Performing Arts
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Rational ALM?
I think usability should be improved in IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) as the top priority. If you look at the UI, it was literally designed ten years ago, and even at the time it was i...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational ALM?
For companies in heavily regulated industries who are doing product development, IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is a good tool. It helps them create documentation that satisfies auditors.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlen...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
 

Also Known As

IBM Engineering Rhapsody, Rational ALM, MKS
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
880,315 professionals have used our research since 2012.