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 Mar 1, 2026

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
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 3.7%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 5.5%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management5.5%
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)3.7%
Other90.8%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

LasseMikkonen - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at byte
Has supported highly regulated documentation needs but requires a modernized user experience
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at the UI, it was literally designed ten years ago, and even at the time it was introduced, it was already somewhat outdated. Even though it is a professional tool, nowadays people expect at least some level of usability from their tools, regardless of how professional the task is. Additionally, if you want to utilize it on a wide scale in an organization, you need to train every person to use it. There is always a threshold for new users to start using it.
Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone
Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities
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 bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The integration with Git works well."
"For companies in heavily regulated industries who are doing product development, IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is a good tool as it helps them create documentation that satisfies auditors."
"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."
"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."
"I would rate the stability of this product a nine out of ten."
"It's easy to use."
"It is relatively easy to use and user-friendly once the setup is complete."
"The tools for requirement capture we have found very useful."
"The integration with UFT is nice."
"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"The execution module and the test planning module are definitely the most valuable features. The rest we use for traceability, but those are the two modules that I cannot live without."
"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"
"From my service provider perspective, the best features of the product are real-time tracking and reporting capabilities, which help with project management by enabling real-time tracking and reporting."
"The most valuable features of OpenText ALM include its integration with the automation landscape, the ability to capture requirements and map them to test cases, and the capability to schedule runs through ALM."
"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."
"As a stand-alone test management tool, it's a good tool."
 

Cons

"The product must be more user-friendly."
"The user interface requires significant improvement as it is overly complex."
"Of course it would be related to customer experience. The solution is not user friendly at all. It needs an expert to use it, although the reporting feature was okay."
"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 stability of IBM Rational ALM could be improved."
"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."
"IBM Rational ALM should remove the features not used by the customers and keep this product as lightweight as possible."
"I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."
"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."
"The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard."
"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."
"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet."
"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is not cheap."
"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."
"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 full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."
"The licensing fee is a little expensive."
"The solution is priceed high."
"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."
"It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"Pricing could be improved as it's high-priced. I don't exactly know the pricing point, but previously, I know that it was really high so less people were able to use it for their projects."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
19%
Government
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Performing Arts
9%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
 

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 Enterprise162
 

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: March 2026.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.