IBM Rational ClearQuest vs. OpenText ALM/Quality Center

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM Rational ClearQuest
Score 7.4 out of 10
N/A
A customizable database workflow application development and production system that provides better visibility and control. IBM Rational ClearQuest is change management software that helps improve developer productivity while accommodating the methodologies, processes and tools that best fit the project and the people on the team. It provides tools and processes used to maintain control of changes while catering to the diverse needs of the developer.N/A
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
OpenText™ ALM/Quality Center, formerly from Micro Focus, serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps users to govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.N/A
Pricing
IBM Rational ClearQuestOpenText ALM/Quality Center
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Rational ClearQuestOpenText ALM/Quality Center
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM Rational ClearQuestOpenText ALM/Quality Center
Considered Both Products
IBM Rational ClearQuest
Chose IBM Rational ClearQuest
Against all those mentioned, IBM ClearQuest rates last on my list
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Chose OpenText ALM/Quality Center

For requirements, we have also reviewed Blue Print, Version One, etc. Currently, the go forward solution is being decided. Whatever the final requirements application is, integration with HP ALM will be done to support traceability.

For testing, there are a large number of …

Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
IBM Rational ClearQuestOpenText ALM/Quality Center
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.2 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Whatfix
Whatfix
Score 9.5 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Whatfix
Whatfix
Score 9.5 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM Rational ClearQuestOpenText ALM/Quality Center
Likelihood to Recommend
4.0
(6 ratings)
7.2
(31 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(2 ratings)
9.0
(2 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(2 ratings)
3.0
(2 ratings)
Support Rating
9.0
(2 ratings)
7.4
(2 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Configurability
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
1.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM Rational ClearQuestOpenText ALM/Quality Center
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM
If you are familiar with IBM Rational Suite products, RequisitePro will add up due to the synergy between other components. Beyond that, if your business is not structured to an adequate development methodology or lacks the degree of maturity or necessary resources, probably RequisitePro does not add much value. If you work with developers in the requirements analysis, they probably prefer to use an SVN repository.
Read full review
OpenText
For an organisation that has completely adopted SAFe structure including naming terminology, it is less appropriate and apart from that. It can suit any organisation out there, and it can solve all your problems one way or another by customising it. It is a robust and highly scalable solution to support all the business needs. It improves a lot of productivity and visibility.
Read full review
Pros
IBM
  • Capability to query bugs on multiple criteria and export it to csv for triages.
  • Simple and intuitive user experience and clearly planned defect life cycle
  • There are other features like assigning the defect to pull request, clearly explaining defect by attaching screenshots, detailed description etc
  • If you are using other IBM tools for requirements documentation, this tool integrates very well
Read full review
OpenText
  • If you have a mix of automation & manual test suites, HPALM is the best tool to manage that. It definitely integrates very well with HP automation tools like HP Unified Functional Testing and HP LoadRunner. Automated Suites can be executed, reports can be maintained automatically. It also classifies which test suites are manual & which are automated & managers can see the progress happening in moving from manual to automated suites. In HPA ALM all the functional test suites, performance test suites, security suites can be defined, managed & tracked in one place.
  • It is a wonderful tool for test management. Whether you want to create test cases, or import it, from execution to snapshot capturing, it supports all activities very well. The linking of defects to test runs is excellent. Any changes in mandatory fields or status of the defect triggers an e-mail and sent automatically to the user that the defect is assigned to.
  • It also supports devops implementation by interacting with development tool sets such as Jenkins & GIT. It also bring in team collaboration by supporting collaboration tools like Slack and Hubot.
  • This tool can integrate to any environment, any source control management tool bringing in changes and creates that trace-ability and links between source control changes to requirements to tests across the sdlc life-cycle.
Read full review
Cons
IBM
  • Performance can be an issue. Make certain the server is sized properly
  • There is a large difference in capability of the Thick Client Version compared with the web based version. Make certain each job function has proper access to be able to do what is required of them.
  • Learning curve is not too steep, but would suggest having someone with experience setup the repository. Highly suggest getting a contractor to assist to get the repository up and running.
Read full review
OpenText
  • The requirements module is not as user friendly as other applications, such as Blue Bird. Managing requirements is usually done in another tool. However, having the requirements in ALM is important to ensure traceability to tests and defects.
  • Reporting across multiple ALM repositories is not supported within the tool. Only graphs are included within ALM functionality. Due to size considerations, one or two projects is not a good solution. Alternatively, we have started leveraging the template functionality within ALM and are integrating with a third party reporting tool to work around this issue.
  • NET (not Octane) requires a package for deployment to machines without administrative rights. Every time there is a change, a new package must be created, which increases the time to deploy. It also forces us to wait until multiple patches have been provided before updating production.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
IBM
Most likely as it's one of the powerful tools in the organization. We needed this tool to track all the process related documentation and also to capture signatures.
Read full review
OpenText
I like the ease to use and its reliable.
Read full review
Usability
IBM
Please keep in mind that this all has to do with you you customize the user interface. It becomes very easy to house all of your requirements, but it may and can make life difficult for you if you do not think ahead of how you want the app to work and house your data
Read full review
OpenText
Because it lets me track the test cases with detailed scenarios and is clearly separated in folders. Also the defect filter helps me filter only the ones that have been assigned to a particular area of interest. The availability of reports lets me see the essentials fields which I might be missing the data on and helps me to work on these instead of having to go through everything.
Read full review
Support Rating
IBM
IBM has good support and knowledge base. With the wealth of information on their site and the support desk, we were able to quickly resolve issues. It is smart to build up a COE and a group that manages the software otherwise it is quick to be able to lose the knowledge as team members are assigned different duties
Read full review
OpenText
It is a great tool, however, it got this rating because there is a lot of learning that takes a lot longer than other tools. There are no mobile versions of ALM even with just a project summary view. I believe ALM is well capable of integration with other analytics tools that can help business solutions prediction based on current and past project data. This is Data held in ALM but with no other use apart from human reading and project progress. ALM looks like a steady platform that I believe can handle more dynamic functionality. You could add an internal communication platform that is not a third party. Limit that communication tool to specific project members.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
IBM
It was pretty simple.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
IBM
IBM clearquest would the BEST option if you are looking for managing change requests, managing project workflows, generating reports on status of requests. The reason being: cost, cost and cost. It almost handles everything that you would need for your project including bug tracking unless you want something really fancy (like HP QC) with a higher cost that supports a wide variety of needs which you might need to evaluate based on your project needs. For example, if you would be really making use of all those additional features provided by HP Quality Center. To be honest it depends on your project size, the skills of team members and of course budget!
Read full review
OpenText
We have other tools in our organization like Atlassian JIRA and Microsoft Team Foundation Server, which are very capable tools but very narrow in their approach and feature set and does not come even close to the some of the core capabilities of HP ALM. HP ALM is the "System of Record" in our organization. It gives visibility for an artifact throughout the delivery chain, which cut downs unnecessary bottlenecks and noise during releases.
Read full review
Return on Investment
IBM
  • IBM Rational ClearQuest has provided a workflow that works without unique software methodology. As a result we deliver complete software products to our clients in a 6 to 8 week development time frame.
  • As a result of our highly customized implementation, we have 8 resources supporting IBM Rational ClearQuest. Three of the resources are full time configuration management staff that administer and support the tool set and the other 5 are from the testing group that handle ClearQuest user support issues in addition to their testing duties.
Read full review
OpenText
  • ALM/QC has allowed for quick, traceable turnaround on relatively simple tasks
  • ALM/QC allows us to achieve our business objective of always being able to refer to a documented ticket for work being done.
  • ALM/QC navigation is not the easiest, so this aspect of the product has caused great frustration among new users.
Read full review
ScreenShots