OpenText ALM/Quality Center vs. Planview AgilePlace

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.7 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
Planview AgilePlace
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
AgilePlace is a project management solution built around flexibility, data-driven analytics, and workflow automation. The software was acquired by Planview in December 2017 to expand that company's capabilities.
$19
per user, per month
Pricing
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterPlanview AgilePlace
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Teams
$19
per user, per month
Scaled Teams
$29
per user, per month
Custom
Contact Sales for Quote
per user, per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterPlanview AgilePlace
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsAll editions include unlimited boards.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterPlanview AgilePlace
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons

No answers on this topic

Features
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterPlanview AgilePlace
Project Management
Comparison of Project Management features of Product A and Product B
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
-
Ratings
Planview AgilePlace
7.0
21 Ratings
2% below category average
Task Management00 Ratings7.921 Ratings
Resource Management00 Ratings7.319 Ratings
Gantt Charts00 Ratings6.712 Ratings
Scheduling00 Ratings6.517 Ratings
Support for Agile Methodology00 Ratings7.917 Ratings
Support for Waterfall Methodology00 Ratings6.812 Ratings
Document Management00 Ratings6.57 Ratings
Email integration00 Ratings7.315 Ratings
Mobile Access00 Ratings6.812 Ratings
Timesheet Tracking00 Ratings6.44 Ratings
Change request and Case Management00 Ratings6.68 Ratings
Visual planning tools00 Ratings8.07 Ratings
Agile Development
Comparison of Agile Development features of Product A and Product B
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
-
Ratings
Planview AgilePlace
7.3
5 Ratings
4% below category average
DevOps Tool Integrations00 Ratings7.33 Ratings
Dependencies and Blockers00 Ratings7.35 Ratings
Best Alternatives
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterPlanview AgilePlace
Small Businesses
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
Craft
Craft
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterPlanview AgilePlace
Likelihood to Recommend
7.2
(31 ratings)
7.9
(27 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(2 ratings)
7.7
(3 ratings)
Usability
3.0
(2 ratings)
8.2
(5 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
8.3
(2 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Support Rating
7.4
(2 ratings)
10.0
(2 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.7
(3 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(2 ratings)
Ease of integration
1.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
-
(0 ratings)
9.3
(2 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
-
(0 ratings)
9.3
(2 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterPlanview AgilePlace
Likelihood to Recommend
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
Planview
This tool enables the visual management needed in many offshore teams to easily and quickly see the pending work, work in progress and completed work.For teams that work with a waterfall methodology and do not have AGILE internalized, I believe there are other solutions from Planview or other providers.
Read full review
Pros
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
Planview
  • Ability to color code cards based on type, giving better visibility to the variety of tasks a team handles
  • Ability to set deadline dates and have those dates easily visible
  • Flexibility in design the kanban board. It is easy to add a lane or make a change on the fly. Work doesn't have to stop and a long process created to make simple layout changes.
  • Movement of cards is easy as well as the ability to connect cards to show dependencies.
Read full review
Cons
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
Planview
  • Planview LeanKit currently can't or should not be used as a central spot for data and collaboration. Particularly attachments are not well-handled.
  • The portable side of Planview LeanKit is really lacking.
  • We would appreciate some options to group or stack cards.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
I like the ease to use and its reliable.
Read full review
Planview
Perfect tool to manage requirement backlog
Read full review
Usability
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
Planview
LeanKit isn't the best designed Kanban system I've seen, but overall it's pretty usable. The boards I've used are pretty complex, so it can be difficult to find things. I found that searching and filtering for specific cards was somewhat of a challenge. Dragging a card from one lane to another is kind of a fun way to get things done though.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Planview
Very minimal outages
Read full review
Performance
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Planview
Never experienced major slowness
Read full review
Support Rating
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
Planview
It solves all our needs at this time.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Planview
Very easy.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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
Planview
I think that LeanKit is very similar to Asana's Kanban feature and Trello, but is much less sleek looking than Asana. Asana's clean and sleek UI makes me enjoy project management much more than LeanKit. It might sound silly that the UI makes so much of a difference to me, but it really does. Trello is also sleeker than LeanKit, but I still prefer Asana because it has more customization options and a better interface. We are actually going to look into switching to ClickUp because we wanted something with a better UI. ClickUp seems to have a great UI with a lot of customization options.
Read full review
Scalability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Planview
Good use cases for small/large teams
Read full review
Return on Investment
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
Planview
  • Our team meetings are more direct and quick to get through thanks to the better visibility of the workload
  • Easily being able to move cards between team lanes gives instant visibility to where the responsibility for the next step is needed.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Planview AgilePlace Screenshots

Screenshot of Real-Time Analytics: Utilize board health metrics involving bottlenecks, WIP, and throughput to guide the optimization of workflows, improve velocity, and better prioritize efforts for more predictable delivery. Lean and Agile metrics can be used to assess team performance and promote continuous improvement.Screenshot of PI Planning: Offers enterprise Kanban boards to visualize the work of teams regardless of the methodologies they apply or workflows they follow, and insights into progress and create opportunities for better alignment.Screenshot of Dependency Visualization and Management: Surfaces risks to plans resulting from cross-team dependency conflicts, blockers, and capacity constraints, and helps drive proactive measures to enable teams to deliver on time.Screenshot of Team Planning and Coordination: Boards can be used to breakdown work, build and manage plans, and execute against strategy to deliver more value to customers, faster.