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

Jira vs OpenText ALM / Quality Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.3
Jira enhances efficiency and productivity, offering quick ROI and integration, though opinions on updates and support are mixed.
Sentiment score
6.8
OpenText ALM enhances oversight, testing efficiency, and collaboration, offering cost savings and reduced defects, despite standardization challenges.
It acts as an enabler for effective test and program management.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
Atlassian's documentation and forums often suffice, but customer support has mixed reviews on responsiveness and problem-solving effectiveness.
Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText ALM customer service varies from fair to excellent, but response times and expertise often need improvement.
Technical support has been excellent.
Quality is always high yet not perfect.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Jira is scalable with planning, though some face performance issues and integration concerns as demands grow.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText ALM/Quality Center excels in scalability and flexibility, despite some licensing and performance challenges, meeting diverse organizational needs.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Jira is praised for its stability and performance, with occasional issues mostly related to server setups or customizations.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText ALM/Quality Center is generally stable and dependable, though it faces occasional performance and crash issues under heavy use.
From a stability standpoint, OpenText ALM Quality Center has been pretty good.
 

Room For Improvement

Jira's complex interface, limited features, and high costs hinder usability, requiring improvements in performance, integration, and customization.
OpenText ALM/Quality Center struggles with high costs, outdated features, poor integration, inadequate reporting, and limited modern methodology support.
Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.
I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the market.
HPLM has one of the best UIs compared to other test management tools, allowing for efficient navigation between test pieces, test folders, test suites, and test execution.
 

Setup Cost

Jira offers flexible, moderately priced licensing with subscription options, but costs can rise with plugins and large deployments.
OpenText ALM/Quality Center pricing is high, justified for large enterprises, but users seek more competitive pricing versus open-source rivals.
It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
 

Valuable Features

Jira provides robust project management, Agile support, and integrations, enhancing team collaboration with customizable workflows and a user-friendly interface.
OpenText ALM/Quality Center offers robust traceability, customization, tool integration, test management, automation support, and comprehensive reporting for effective project tracking.
The integration with internal applications and CollabNet is made possible through exposed APIs, allowing necessary integrations.
It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results.
We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered.
 

Categories and Ranking

Jira
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
274
Ranking in other categories
Application Requirements Management (2nd), Project Management Software (3rd)
OpenText ALM / Quality Center
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Jira is 23.7%, up from 23.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText ALM / Quality Center is 5.9%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Q&A Highlights

Miriam Tover - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 20, 2019
 

Featured Reviews

Saroj Ekka - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good repository integration, sprint board and easy to set up
There are some features and reports we need that are not there. For example, if I have to find out the capacity of the current sprint by user and compare it with the previous sprint, that visibility isn't there. We can know the capacity and what happened with the whole sprint, but not for an individual person to see where it's falling and how it's tracking. Report and analytics capabilities are important for a product manager. That visibility is important, so we use Jira. Some of the features are there, and I use my own Excels or other data things to compensate for that.
Paul Grossman - PeerSpot reviewer
Range of supported technology expands, but odd IDE design still leave newbies and pro users alike disappointed.
There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed. While I have a larger list of issues that make day to day work harder than it needs to be, these are the Top Five that I do wish would capture someone's attention in upcoming releases. All hit the tool's ROI pretty hard. #1) Jump To Source - The Silent Code Killer: In older QTP versions a double-click on any function in the Toolbox window would take the developer to the function's source code, while a drag from the Toolbox would add it to the code window. Since 12.0 a double-click on a function in UFT's Toolbox window now ADDS the function (same as drag) to the Code window - to whatever random location the cursor happens to be at - even if it is off screen, and it will replace sections of code if it is highlighted. We are not sure what the intention was, but our Best Practice is to avoid the Toolbox window entirely to avoid the real danger of losing days of work and needless bug hunts. Now Jump to Source is not all bad. A right-click on any function called from a Script takes us to the code source, which is great! But it only half works: in a Library, only for functions declared within the same library. Our advance designs have well over twelve libs so a whole lot of extra time is spent searching the entire project for a function's source on a daily basis. Lastly, while we can add custom methods to object, a Jump To Source from these methods is long overdue. So again our only option is to search the entire project. #2) Object Spy: It needs to have multiple instances so that you can compare multiple object properties side-by-side. It lacks a Refresh button, so that automation engineers can quickly identify the property changes of visible and invisible objects. Or HP could skip to option #3... #3) Add RegEx integer support for .Height or .Width object properties when retrieving object collections. If this were possible, our framework could return collections that contain only visible objects that have a .height property greater that zero. (Side Note: the .Visible property has not returned a False value for us in nearly five years - a recent developer decision, not a product issue) Eliminating the need to separate the non-visible objects from visible ones would decrease execution time dramatically. (Another side note: Our experiments to RegEx integer-based .Height properties found that we could get a collection of just invisible objects. Exactly the opposite of what we needed.) #4) The shortcut to a treasure trove of sample code in the latest release 14.0 has been inexplicably removed. This impeeds new users from having an easy time learning the tool's advanced capability. In fact the only users daring enough to go find it now will be you who is reading this review. #5) Forced Return to Script Code. This again is a no-brainer design flaw. Let's say we run a script and throw an error somewhere deep in our function library. Hey it happens. In prior QTP versions when the Stop button would be clicked the tool would leave you right there at the point where the error occurred to fix. Now in recent releases, UFT always takes us back to the main Script, far from that code area that needed immediate attention.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
831,615 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

Miriam Tover - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 20, 2019
Aug 20, 2019
It all depends on your context. In my case, I work for a big company with quite heavy processes. Octane is more suitable. The big difference is this: - JIRA's strong point is the possibility of adding plugins, so you can adapt JIRA to your needs. The flaw in my case is that the upgraded version of JIRA will become more complex and it must be ensured that all plugins are compatible. - Octane i...
2 out of 4 answers
MS
Aug 9, 2019
I don't know enough about Micro Focus ALM but based from what I have seen it does provide a lot more than JIRA. I have worked with Azure DevOps and know that it can also provide more than JIRA. AZURE DevOps seems to be similar in comparison with Micro Focus ALM. So I would say if it was between JIRA and Micro Focus, then I will choose the latter.
CD
Aug 9, 2019
Micro Focus ALM is a complete Test Management tool that can cover Requirements management, Defects management, Test Plan, Test Execution Suites as well as automation test executions with MF UFT (former HP QC). If you have a testing heavy project then MF ALM covers all the testing expectations well. However, in an integrated environment with development, releases, and testing, JIRA can offer a better experience for JIRA issues (for requirements and incidents/defects), add-on for testing from JIRA marketplace (e.g. X-Ray) and offers a better fitment for DevOps. Developers and testers can work with the same tool for defects. requirements i.e. JIRA and manage testing with JIRA add-ons for Test Management.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
52%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
6%
Educational Organization
65%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Is Jira better or would you go with Micro Focus ALM Octane?
Hi Netanya, Basically , it all depends on the use cases for your environment and the business needs. Hope the below data may be relevant to you for identifying your needs and deciding on the approp...
Which is better - Jira or Microsoft Azure DevOps?
Jira is a great centralized tool for just about everything, from local team management to keeping track of products and work logs. It is easy to implement and navigate, and it is stable and scalabl...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Jira?
We operate under a nonlimited license with Jira, allowing a number of users to access it with a single enterprise license.
What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.
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?
The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult. Issues with mapping multiple functional test cases to one automated test case nee...
 

Also Known As

Jira Software
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Square, Nasa, eBay, Cisco, SalesForce, Adobe, BNP Paribas, BMW and LinkedIn, Pfizer, Citi.
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about Jira vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,615 professionals have used our research since 2012.