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

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category. IBM is ranked #13 with an average rating of 7.2, while OpenText is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.2. IBM holds a 3.9% mindshare in ALM, compared to OpenText’s 4.9% mindshare. Additionally, 76% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle M...

Read 19 IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) reviews

1,497 Views
1,482 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

5,181 Views
3,316 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

IBM Engineering Lifecycle M...

OpenText Application Qualit...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 20, 2025

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management and OpenText Application Quality Management are competitors in lifecycle management and quality assurance. IBM ELM is preferred for pricing and support, whereas OpenText offers a superior feature set, justifying its higher cost.

Features: IBM ELM integrates seamlessly with complex development environments and emphasizes lifecycle governance. It excels in process automation, enhancing workflow efficiencies. OpenText Application Quality Management features robust test management and reporting, supported by advanced analytical tools and comprehensive dashboards. It focuses on quality management with a user-friendly interface.

Room for Improvement: IBM ELM could enhance its analytical capabilities and add more flexibility to its dashboards. Better integration with third-party tools would be beneficial. OpenText might improve its support responsiveness and streamline customization options. User-interface upgrades might also increase its appeal.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM ELM offers flexible on-premise and cloud deployment and is noted for its responsive customer service. OpenText provides a robust cloud-based deployment solution with strong customer support, ensuring smooth implementation.

Pricing and ROI: IBM ELM offers cost-effective pricing, providing substantial ROI through its integration capabilities. OpenText's pricing reflects its extensive feature set, delivering significant ROI through its advanced quality management functions. IBM's cost-efficiency contrasts OpenText's higher price points justified by enhanced features.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

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

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 870,701 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 Engineering Lifecycle M...

Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

13th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

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 (4th), Test Management Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is 3.9%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 4.9%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management	4.9%
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)	3.9%
Other	91.2%

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Featured Reviews

Juergen Albrecht

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.

Read full review

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer 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.

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

"The transition to a SaaS-based solution is a distinct advantage."

"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."

"The tools for requirement capture we have found very useful."

"The integration with Git works well."

"I would rate the stability of this product a nine out of ten."

"The word emulation and importing is good."

"You can customize the board according to your needs."

"The cataloging is a very valuable feature. For a lot of enterprises, they end up not knowing which applications do specific features. The cataloging helps with this. It's not that verbose, but it still gives you allowances to put in more detail."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) pros

"I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."

"I found the ease of use most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Creating test cases is easier because the solution allows writing in Excel."

"As a system administrator, HPE ALM can be flexibly configured so that it can accommodate a variety of defined project lifecycles and test methodologies."

"The setup is pretty straightforward."

"Having used the tool before, I like the use of parameters, being able to do exports and reports of the data for monitoring of executions, and the defect management as well. I feel satisfaction in that area."

"We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone."

"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."

"The tool's most valuable feature is that it is user-friendly, and everybody can learn to use it easily."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

Cons

"Some improvements to the user interface (UI) would be helpful, such as exposing more services to make it easier to customize to the needs of each customer."

"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."

"One of the complaints from users is that they have to click buttons too many times for just a simple task. Changing this would lead to a better user experience."

"There is not enough beginner support material in the form of FAQs or simple training to help you get started."

"The features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate."

"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."

"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."

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) cons

"Certain features are lousy. Those features can drag the whole server down. There are times that the complex SQL queries are not easy to do within this solution."

"There are great features, however, transitioning between partners and managing a large number of test cases can be time-consuming."

"I'd like to be able to improve how our QA department uses the tool, by getting better educational resources, documentation to help with competencies for my testers."

"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."

"It needs Pure-FTPd WebUI and single sign-on."

"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."

"There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval."

"It is pricey."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

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."

"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."

"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."

"The solution is priceed high."

"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."

"It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us."

"Compared to the market, the price is high."

"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."

"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

870,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

23%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

12%

Transportation Company

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Performing Arts

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	39
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	161

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational ALM?

The solution is customizable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Rational ALM?

Improvement is needed in bridging DNG and Rhapsody and vice versa for better data exchange from both sides with some trigger technologies. This would provide a visual reminder of changes in a modul...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for IBM Rational ALM?

Most of my primary use cases involve the combination of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) ( /products/ibm-engineering-lifecycle-management-elm-reviews ) and DOORS, including both Classic D...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

Jira vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 24% of the time

Codebeamer vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 18% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 12% of the time

Polarion ALM vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 10% of the time

Rally Software vs IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) Competitors

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 16% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 15% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 13% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 11% of the time

IBM Engineering Test Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM)

October 2025

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) report

Download IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

October 2025

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

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

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management stands out for its robust Agile Scrum planning, lifecycle traceability, and tool management, offering cloud-based configurability and strong collaboration features.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management provides rich capabilities for Agile project management, facilitating requirements and test management, configuration management, and version control. Its integration with IBM Doors supports comprehensive requirements handling, and the cloud-based platform enhances collaborative efficiency across teams. Despite needing advances in user-friendliness and reporting, ELM's global configuration and compliance features make it invaluable in demanding environments.

What are the key features of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management?

Scrum-based planning: Supports Agile methodologies with rich planning tools.
Lifecycle traceability: Offers complete traceability across development stages.
Customizable workflows: Adaptable workflows with Kanban for flexibility.
Git integration: Supports efficient version control and collaboration.
Global Configuration: Manages complex configurations globally.
Compliance and reporting: Ensures robust auditing and comprehensive reporting capabilities.

What benefits should be evaluated in reviews?

Collaboration: Enhanced sharing across platforms for seamless teamwork.
Cost-effectiveness: Delivers efficient tools that optimize project spend.
Comprehensive requirement handling: Facilitates detailed requirement management through IBM Doors integration.

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management is vital in sectors like automotive and manufacturing, where it implements Agile frameworks to manage requirements, conduct testing, and handle defects. It integrates into development pipelines ensuring live traceability and visibility, supporting critical engineering processes efficiently.

IBM

OpenText Application Quality Management offers centralized data management, traceability, and integration capabilities. It aids in handling requirements, test planning, and defect tracking while supporting both manual and automated testing. Challenges exist in deployment and browser compatibility.

Known for its robust reporting and flexibility, OpenText Application Quality Management is tailored for large organizations requiring a comprehensive solution supporting lifecycle coverage and seamless tool integration. Users can consolidate testing processes, manage requirements, and centralize reporting across manual and automated testing. While some face issues with project tracking, outdated interfaces, and limited browser compatibility beyond Internet Explorer, it remains widely used for regression and performance testing. Integration with tools like JIRA and support for tools such as UFT and ALM PC underscore its utility.

What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Centralized Data Management: Consolidates and organizes testing data efficiently.
Traceability: Ensures traceability across all stages of the testing lifecycle.
Integration Capabilities: Connects seamlessly with automation and other essential tools.
Test Planning and Execution: Supports both manual and automated tests in a streamlined manner.
Advanced Reporting: Provides robust options to generate insightful test reports.
Customization: Offers tailored solutions to fit specific organizational needs.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Efficiency: Increases test management efficiency across projects.
Scalability: Adapts to the varying scope of large-scale projects.
Lifecycle Coverage: Comprehensive management from requirement to defect tracking.
User-Friendly Interface: Designed for ease of use despite needing updates.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances high initial costs with long-term savings through efficient testing management.

In industries such as finance and healthcare, OpenText Application Quality Management is implemented to ensure rigorous testing standards. It supports test case creation and execution, defect tracking, and requirements management. Integration with JIRA and performance testing tools make it suitable for organizations needing synchronized testing environments.

OpenText

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)

Buyer's Guide

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

September 2025

Free Report: IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

870,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) vs. OpenText Application Quality Management report.

See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.

We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.