Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo

Top 10 IBM Engineering Test Management Alternatives

Vendor: IBM
3.8 out of 5
1,357 followers
Post review

Top IBM Engineering Test Management Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to IBM Engineering Test Management based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, and Tricentis qTest. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

IBM Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with IBM, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
OpenText ALM / Quality Center
4.0 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management is appreciated for its integration with other IBM tools and cost-effectiveness. In comparison, OpenText ALM / Quality Center offers superior end-to-end traceability and extensive test planning. IBM focuses on performance, while OpenText needs user-friendly improvements but provides extensive documentation.
Download IBM Engineering Test Management vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center Report
The setup cost for IBM Engineering Test Management reflects a more flexible pricing model, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center features a higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
The setup cost for IBM Engineering Test Management reflects a more flexible pricing model, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center features a higher initial investment.
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
TestRail
4.0 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
TestRail
4.0 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management excels in integration capabilities and scalability options. In comparison, TestRail is valued for ease of use and strong reporting features. IBM Engineering Test Management offers extensive features but requires complex deployment, whereas TestRail provides faster setup with effective support and lower costs.
Download IBM Engineering Test Management vs. TestRail Report
IBM Engineering Test Management has a high setup cost, while TestRail is known for its more affordable initial expense. The key difference lies in the setup cost, making TestRail a budget-friendly option compared to IBM Engineering Test Management.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Engineering Test Management has a high setup cost, while TestRail is known for its more affordable initial expense. The key difference lies in the setup cost, making TestRail a budget-friendly option compared to IBM Engineering Test Management.
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
Tricentis qTest
4.2 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
Tricentis qTest
4.2 out of 5

IBM Engineering Test Management appeals to tech buyers for its strong traceability and integration capabilities, along with excellent customer service. In comparison, Tricentis qTest's comprehensive test management, automation integration, and ease of deployment justify its higher price for many users.

Download IBM Engineering Test Management vs. Tricentis qTest Report
IBM Engineering Test Management involves a significant initial setup cost, while the setup cost for Tricentis qTest is relatively lower, making it a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Engineering Test Management involves a significant initial setup cost, while the setup cost for Tricentis qTest is relatively lower, making it a more budget-friendly option.
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
Zephyr Enterprise
3.9 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
Zephyr Enterprise
3.9 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management offers comprehensive test planning and traceability capabilities, making it ideal for detailed project management. In comparison, Zephyr Enterprise, with its superior JIRA integration and real-time test metrics, stands out for agile environments requiring advanced reporting and robust integration capabilities.
Download IBM Engineering Test Management vs. Zephyr Enterprise Report
IBM Engineering Test Management has a high initial setup cost, while Zephyr Enterprise offers a more affordable setup, catering to different budget needs. Zephyr Enterprise's pricing is more attractive for cost-conscious projects compared to IBM Engineering Test Management's higher expe...
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Engineering Test Management has a high initial setup cost, while Zephyr Enterprise offers a more affordable setup, catering to different budget needs. Zephyr Enterprise's pricing is more attractive for cost-conscious projects compared to IBM Engineering Test Management's higher expe...
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
IBM Engineering Test Management Logo
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira
3.6 out of 5
IBM Engineering Test Management offers extensive capabilities, including robust reporting and sophisticated test modules. In comparison, Adaptavist Test Management for Jira integrates seamlessly with JIRA and is noted for its ease of use. IBM provides comprehensive test planning while Adaptavist is easier to set up.
Download Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. IBM Engineering Test Management Report
IBM Engineering Test Management requires a higher initial setup cost, while Adaptavist Test Management for Jira offers a more budget-friendly setup option. IBM costs more upfront compared to Adaptavist.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Engineering Test Management requires a higher initial setup cost, while Adaptavist Test Management for Jira offers a more budget-friendly setup option. IBM costs more upfront compared to Adaptavist.

Related categories

Test Management Tools
Load Testing Tools
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites