codeBeamer ALM vs. Polarion ALM

In my opinion codeBeamer is well suited for any activity where detailed tracking is needed with teams involved. It can be less suited for small projects which do not last long, or are not continuous, etc

Large-scale software development projects with multiple teams: Polarion ALM's centralized platform can help teams across different locations and time zones collaborate effectively, ensuring everyone is on the same page. Compliance-focused industries: Polarion ALM's end-to-end traceability and audit trail capabilities can help organizations meet regulatory requirements and reduce the risk of errors. Agile software development: Polarion ALM's support for agile methodologies, such as Scrum and Kanban, can help teams manage and track their work efficiently.

• Tracing of requirements.
• Tracking of development.
• Tracking of QA.
• Tracking of bugs.
• Tracking of releases.
• Wiki.
• Users and teams.
• Works for teams scattered across the globe.
• Testing and coverage for releases.
• Integration with SVN.

• The workflows that are customizable in Polarion are amazing. They have specified workflows for companies that deal with different product lines related to regulatory requirements like medical devices. The ability to enhance "out of the box" workflows helps with risk mitigation immensely without having to allocate so many resources to get it going from ground up.
• Reporting - bringing together dashboards with key metrics is an absolute must and leveraging output based on needs from executive level presentations to development metrics is a winner for us. And the drill downs are immensely useful for anyone who wants to get the microscopic view of what drives our success on that nth degree.
• Over all Risk Mitigation: Risk based ALM is very important to us. The ability to integrate our regulatory SOPs into our own client defined formats and procedures gives us the leverage to tie in all that traceability I discussed earlier into palpable digests of risk which our company leaders use to drive vision.
• Requirements management is an absolute nightmare for most people. Polarion helps us drive requirements on different levels like regualtory, business, user interface, etc. This ties in to all the risk mitigation criteria we so much rely on to make us succeed.

Incentivized

• Search.
• Metric calculation.
• Would be nice that cB is a source of truth, i.e., that say SVN commit is done only from cB; know this is difficult to achieve.

• Text editing in that program may be more sophisticated, similar to what you'd find in Word.
• Views, like Table, Tree, and Matrix, aren't all that easy to figure out.
• Finding items that fit specific criteria using filters is cumbersome and should be made simpler. This is particularly true when filtering numerous documents at once.

Incentivized

There is too much at stake to go into a new system. But with everything else being promised as far as newer more innovative products, the justification to not renew is a huge risk so that is not a concern

Incentivized

Sometimes info in codeBeamer can be lost, in principle, if not well organized by the user, info can never be found, or can be forgotten about, etc

Excellent support professionally. Also, thanks for giving me for free access to SaaS cB for my hobbyist project.

codeBeamer is by far better.

Polarion ALM has the best usability, extensibility and reactiv product management. The support is also very good compared to other companies. Or in other words it is closer to the customer. Codebeamer is for sure also a good ALM tool with a great feature set, but existing customers are often neglected. We will see, what PTC as the new owner of codebeamer will change at this point.

• Customer tracking.
• Process tracking.
• Workflow framework.
• Can be overhead.

• Ability to see and act upon risk components related to requirements to test tracing that would have been missed or overlooked especially during regulatory submission.
• Always ready reporting for executive management based on trending of product releases before they hit the market.
• One negative is the resources required to maintain the tool which for most non large organizations would be a huge overhead.

Incentivized