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

OpenText ALM Octane vs TFS 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
6.9
OpenText ALM Octane reduces costs and increases efficiency by automating processes, streamlining project management, and enhancing analytics.
Sentiment score
7.8
TFS enhances productivity, reduces costs, and integrates well with Microsoft tools, proving valuable for efficient software development.
The ability to generate audit evidence with a single click saves ten days of work for ten people, enabling them to focus on other tasks.
Integrating TFS with Visual Studio and Azure Cloud has improved our development processes by providing better integration and reducing errors.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
OpenText ALM Octane's support is praised for responsiveness and expertise but needs improvement in follow-up times and complex cases.
Sentiment score
7.1
Most users find TFS support efficient, despite some wanting faster responses, with scores generally between 8 and 10.
as a Microsoft product, it might have limited global documentation or support options compared to GitLab.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText ALM Octane is scalable, integrates well with DevOps tools, but users face licensing issues despite reliable performance.
Sentiment score
7.5
TFS is scalable and integrates well with Microsoft apps, but faces challenges in large deployments with high user loads.
We can expand the number of servers and resources as required.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
OpenText ALM Octane offers highly stable performance with minimal issues, regular updates, and efficient support addressing any concerns.
Sentiment score
7.8
TFS is stable and dependable, with minor concerns addressed through updates, but lacks agility compared to Jira.
Its stability is lacking as we have encountered security leaks and glitches.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText ALM Octane struggles with integration, flexibility, and user management, needing improvements in security, support, and Agile processes.
TFS needs stability, interface, merging improvements, better integration, lower costs, simplified features, and enhanced agile and cloud support.
While it aims to be as flexible as possible for a large enterprise application, sometimes there are limitations that may not meet specific organizational needs.
TFS is not as fast, easy to use, or configurable as GitLab, despite moving into the cloud.
I am content with how TFS is structured now, particularly the Azure version.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText ALM Octane is costly but valued for its features and scalability, offering ROI and enhanced support.
TFS pricing is competitive yet complex, favoring Microsoft's subscription for cost efficiency, especially beneficial for existing Microsoft users.
OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText ALM Octane offers extensive agile management, robust test management, seamless integrations, and flexibility for Agile and Waterfall methodologies.
TFS offers versatile version control, seamless Visual Studio integration, robust lifecycle management, and efficient project and code management.
Its ability to generate audit evidence with a single click is a significant advantage, as it saves considerable time and money compared to manual processes.
The integration with Azure DevOps also offers seamless functionality for CI/CD processes.
Makes it easier for me to create builds and release pipelines without needing to program YAML files.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText ALM Octane
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (8th)
TFS
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText ALM Octane is 6.3%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TFS is 4.5%, down from 7.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

GeorgNauerz - PeerSpot reviewer
Makes team collaboration between IT and non-IT users easier with more transparency
The user experience is a lot better than any tool that I have used before. Overall, it is great. It has a smooth interface, which is very user-friendly. It makes it easier to work together and have more transparency and customization, which is very good. There are a lot of features where you can add fields, input individual fields, and input rules, like templated rule-based interaction between entities. The Backlog management is really interesting, because it is all in one place. You don't have a feature here and a feature there, instead you have the Backlog and testing using different backup items, like user storage features and tasks, all in one place. In addition, we are able to write documents, which we can transfer to backup items. Then, we can test them in the same solution without switching tools, or even switching from one part of the tool to another part, because it is all in one place. We use the solution’s Backlog and Team Backlog capabilities. They make our DevOps processes easier through transparency and asset collaboration.
Pmurki@Micron.Com Praveen - PeerSpot reviewer
Version control is excellent and good for code review, branching, merging strategies and more
I've worked with TFS for source control and Agile project management. We also used TFS for seamless team collaboration and tracking.  I used TFS for a couple of years. Now, we use Azure DevOps. It's a wonderful tool for source control and CI/CD pipelines It's a really valuable tool for…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
67%
Computer Software Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Manufacturing Company
3%
 

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...
What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Octane?
The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Octane?
The tool's price is extremely high. When I was using Micro Focus, there were ten licenses, costing around 1,38,000, which was outrageous.
Which is better - TFS or Azure DevOps?
TFS and Azure DevOps are different in many ways. TFS was designed for admins, and only offers incremental improvements. In addition, TFS seems complicated to use and I don’t think it has a very fri...
What do you like most about TFS?
Microsoft's technical team is supportive.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TFS?
While I do not know the exact pricing, TFS is likely more expensive than GitLab.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane
Team Foundation Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange, Airbus, Haufe Group, Kellogg's, Claro, Bon Secours, World Wide Technology
Vendex KBB IT Services, Info Support, Fujitsu Consulting, TCSC, Airways New Zealand, HP
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ALM Octane vs. TFS and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.