IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management vs. Zephyr Scale

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 5.2 out of 10
N/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is an end-to-end engineering solution used to manage system requirements to design, workflow, and test management, extending the functionality of ALM tools for better complex-systems development.N/A
Zephyr Scale
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
TM4j is a test management application for Jira, developed by Jira solutions specialist Adaptavist, acquired and now supported by SmartBear since March 2020.
$4.55
per month per user
Pricing
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementZephyr Scale
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementZephyr Scale
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsFree up to 10 users, $4.55/user/month after that. It gets cheaper as you scale.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementZephyr Scale
Features
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementZephyr Scale
Test Management
Comparison of Test Management features of Product A and Product B
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
-
Ratings
Zephyr Scale
7.8
1 Ratings
4% below category average
Centralized test management00 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Map tests to user stories00 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Test execution reporting00 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Defect management00 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Best Alternatives
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementZephyr Scale
Small Businesses
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementZephyr Scale
Likelihood to Recommend
3.0
(22 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(6 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
4.0
(5 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.0
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementZephyr Scale
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM
The software is robust enough to handle highly complex software development or other product development and can be used well beyond the range to do what a client needs. However, because of the inability to hold its users to proper best practices, things can get wildly out of hand and cascade over the years, creating unnecessary technical debt. The system has a lot of usable features, but they don't funnel users toward the correct processes and practices.
Read full review
SmartBear
Jira and Confluence are widely implemented in organizations of various industries so incorporating Zephyr Scale is a very seamless method of adding scalable testing management. Testing visibility and end to end traceability is possible and integrates in Jira. Developers and engineers are able to take advantage of the built-in reports and statistics and even automate testing. The value is greatly reduced for organizations that do not already implement Jira and Confluence as the native integrated compatibility is much of the value
Read full review
Pros
IBM
  • Open Services supporting Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC).
  • Required definition management and managed capabilities enabling.
  • Rational DOORS Web Access for local on the test field presence.
  • On-sites established reporting system.
  • Approved linking requirements to test plans
  • Engineering Requirements Management DOORS traces requirements thereby eliminates manually processes and spreadsheets, for improved productivity.
  • Returns the investment efficiently.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Scalable and compatible with Jira & Confluence
  • Improves testing visibility, data analysis, collaboration with reports & gadgets
  • Easy to retrospectively trace testing with change history
Read full review
Cons
IBM
  • I feel like it is too heavy sometimes and updating is not very straight forward. For example, if I want to change an incident ticket (IN) to a service request (SR) and add some comment for the change, I have to first change the IN to SR, then click refresh which takes a few seconds, then add a comment. If I forget the refresh step, my comment will be discarded without warning like my ticket is not in the latest status. This also happens when somebody else changes the ticket during my edit as I can not lock the ticket exclusively.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Not as valuable if not already using Jira or Confluence
  • Can be overlooked if the user does not set automation
  • Needs better first time tutorials
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
IBM
At the moment we are required by contract to continue to use the IBM DOORS software for our current client. Given that it can be expensive, if we were to use it after our current client's needs were met, we would have to secure other projects in order to justify the continued use of the software.
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Usability
IBM
The UI is terrible and not intuitive. Users need training in order to complete tasks. Much like SAP, it's not the clearest tool. The tracing feature is especially complicated because you must write the scripts yourself. There is a learning curve. Also, even the setup, installation, and logging in each time takes a considerable amount of time.
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
IBM
It does a basic job and has the potential to complete some robust reporting tasks, however, it really is a clunky piece of software with a terrible user interface that makes using it routinely quite unpleasant. Many of our legacy and maintenance projects still use DOORS but our department and company use many alternatives and are looking for better tools.
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
IBM
No problems
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
IBM
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect management. The overall cost of the tool is great too and well within budget.
Read full review
SmartBear
Zephyr scale is easier to work with and more seamlessly used because it is natively integrated with Jira and Confluence. TestRail cannot provide the same scalable experience and is rather dated and limited in capability. Developers rather use tools that are compatible with each other, and Zephyr scale offers that
Read full review
Return on Investment
IBM
  • It's part of CLM suite so it can be used to manage the whole lifecycle with tight integration with development module (Rational Team Concert) and quality module (Rational Quality Manager).
  • Comprehensive reports and dashboards provide better visibility.
  • License cost is on higher side.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Dozens of added testing capability via integrated gadgets
  • Reduced testing and tracking time
  • Faster and clearer testing operations awareness
Read full review
ScreenShots