OpenText ALM/Quality Center vs. TestRail

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
TestRail
Score 6.7 out of 10
N/A
TestRail by Gurock, an IDERA company, is presented as a complete web-based test case management solution to manage, track, and organize your software testing efforts.N/A
Pricing
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterTestRail
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterTestRail
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
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterTestRail
Considered Both Products
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Chose OpenText ALM/Quality Center
We ultimately opted for the Micro Focus ALM / Quality Center since it offers best in class features and good value for money.
TestRail

No answer on this topic

Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterTestRail
Test Management
Comparison of Test Management features of Product A and Product B
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
-
Ratings
TestRail
7.0
1 Ratings
14% below category average
Centralized test management00 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Manage test hosts and schedules00 Ratings6.01 Ratings
Map tests to user stories00 Ratings6.01 Ratings
Test execution reporting00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Defect management00 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Best Alternatives
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterTestRail
Small Businesses
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.7 out of 10
Enterprises
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterTestRail
Likelihood to Recommend
7.2
(31 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
3.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.4
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
1.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText ALM/Quality CenterTestRail
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
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
The integration with other tools, and their user friendly layout and design. It's very comfortable to use and is way better than other tools with the Automation Testing tools, thanks to the great API that is included. Sometimes the integration with Jira is a little faulty, but the links to that tool usually work well. It could be cool if it had a better following for the bug items that were registered on other tools.
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
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
  • Beautiful and productive UI.
  • Nice filtering system allowing me to find what I need quickly.
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
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
  • Integration with Jira seems [a] little faulty.
  • Increase the API call limit for different editions.
  • Better way to trigger automation suites from TestRail.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
I like the ease to use and its reliable.
Read full review
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
No answers on this topic
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
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
No answers on this topic
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
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
No answers on this topic
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
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
TestRail definitely saves times. I work in a company that consists of several development teams, all of which have different processes. Some of the teams leverage test cases, some do not. I've noticed that the turn around time it takes for me to pick up a ticket, QA it, and then pass/fail/send feedback is much faster when there is a test case created as I'm not reading through ticket description/comments to figure out what needs to be QA'd.
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
IDERA (an Idera, Inc. company)
  • Improved test management process and collaboration inside team.
  • Increased transparency of QA work.
  • Team became more satisfied.
Read full review
ScreenShots