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

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis LiveCompare comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 21, 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

OpenText ALM / Quality Center
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (1st)
Tricentis LiveCompare
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
35th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
SAP Service Providers (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of OpenText ALM / Quality Center is 5.6%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis LiveCompare is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

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.
it_user713811 - PeerSpot reviewer
Accurately identifies what will be affected in production after a change or upgrade
The LiveCompare apps that my customers and I have benefitted from the most are analyses and reports on the following: * Upgrades – LiveCompare's Impact Analysis functionality accurately identifies what will be affected in production as the result of a change or an upgrade. It can also pinpoint accurately the scope of testing needed in anticipation of an upgrade. * Migration to SAP Hana – LiveCompare's unique reporting and advanced analytics streamline the entire migration process to SAP Hana, while minimizing costs, risk, and time. * SAP License management optimization. * Custom code analytics – Includes usage monitoring, quality and performance monitoring, Java analysis, and ABAP code quality. * Testing - LiveCompare optimizes the entire testing phase in upgrade projects.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"You can plan ahead with all the requirements and the test lab set it up as a library, then go do multiple testing times, recording the default that's in the system."
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements."
"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."
"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"
"The product can scale."
"I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent."
"LiveCompare's Impact Analysis functionality identifies accurately what will be affected in production as the result of a change or an upgrade. It can also pinpoint accurately the scope of testing needed in anticipation of an upgrade."
"LiveCompare's unique reporting and advanced analytics streamline the entire migration process to SAP Hana, while minimizing costs, risk, and time."
 

Cons

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve its marketing. For example, Tricentis is much better at letting the market know about new solutions and updates. The migration of the tool could improve, but it can be difficult."
"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."
"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."
"There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements."
"They should specify every protocol or process with labels or names."
"From my experience with the product, I would suggest adding a feature that would allow a customer who is reviewing the LiveCompare results to be able to connect remotely with one of IntelliCorp's experts (aside from their support) in order to assist the customer to better understand the results."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."
"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
"IntelliCorp is flexible in terms of licensing and the pricing structure. They are open to discussing a customer's specific requirements."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
847,625 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
68%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
4%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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?
We work with Jira now, and there are some very good workflows. There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval. I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the mar...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Coca-Cola, eBay, BP, British American Tobacco, Surrey Country Council, AES, P66, MUD, Bentley Motors, Coats, Hershey, Kimberly Clark
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: April 2025.
847,625 professionals have used our research since 2012.