We performed a comparison between GitLab and Polarion ALM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Agile Planning Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."CI/CD is valuable for me."
"It is very flexible and easy because you can store data on cloud."
"A user friendly solution."
"The most valuable features of GitLab are the CI/CD pipeline and code management."
"GitLab is very useful for pipelines, continuous integration, and continuous deployment. It is also stable."
"It is very useful for reviews. We are using branch merging operations and full reset operations. It is also very useful for merging our code and tracking another branch. The graph diagrams of Git are very useful. Its interface is straightforward and not too complex for us."
"It's a great toolbox where the CI/CD pipeline is the fundamental component, but there are so many other features that you can pull from, which makes it a very powerful tool. My current client is using AWS, and they can, of course, use AWS CodePipeline, but GitLab is much more mature than that, and it also gives you the freedom to decide to go to another platform or have a multi-cloud strategy and things like that. That freedom for me is also very valuable."
"The merging feature makes it easy later on for the deployment."
"The features I find the most valuable are requirement tracking and schematics."
"The most valuable feature is the function of the ALM system."
"The best feature of Polarion ALM to me is its traceability link."
"It offers good performance."
"Polarion ALM helps us better structure our customer requirements, and we can also validate the specs of our products against those. If anything changes on our side, we see the impact, and we can see the effect If a customer changes requirements."
"You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs."
"We had a nice experience with technical support."
"The tool helped us to more effectively and efficiently gather and structure the information (requirements, test plans, project management data, etc.), and share it with the involved stakeholders in a safe and change-controlled manner."
"I've noticed an area for improvement in GitLab, particularly needing to go through many steps to push the code to the repository. Resolving that issue would make the product better. My team quickly fixed it by writing a small script, then double-clicking or enabling the script to take care of the issue. However, that quick fix was from my team and not the GitLab team, so in the next release, if an automatic deployment feature would be available in GitLab, then that would be good because, in Visual Studio, you can do that with just one click of a button."
"I would like to see static analysis also embedded in GitLab. That would also help us. If there's something that it does internally by GitLab and then that is already tied up with your pipeline and then it can tell you that you're coding is good or your code is not great. Based on that, it would pass or fail. That should be streamlined. I would think that would help to a greater extent, in terms of having one solution rather than depending on multiple vendors."
"It could have more security integrations and the ability to check the vulnerability of the code. I don't think it is a responsibility of Gitlab, but it would be nice to have more options to integrate with."
"The pricing model of GitLab is an issue for me."
"GitLab could improve the patch repository. It does not have support for Conan patch version regions. Additionally, better support for Kubernetes deployment is needed as part of the package."
"In the free version, when a merge request is raised, there is no way to enforce certain rules. We can't enforce that this merge request must be reviewed or approved by two or three people in the team before it is pushed to the master branch. That's why we are exploring using some agents."
"Some of the scripts that we encountered in GitLab were not fully functional and threw up errors."
"It should be used by a larger number of people. They should raise awareness."
"The configuration aspect of the solution is not easy. A person needs a lot of programming knowledge in order to successfully handle the job."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and a server-based application rather than client based."
"The interface for this solution needs to be made more user-friendly to provide a better user experience."
"The user interface is not yet optimized."
"Test management lacks an automated process."
"Based on my understanding, the tool's integration capabilities with multiple tools is an area of concern that Polarion needs to focus on more."
"The ease-of-use could be improved a little."
"The weak point of Polarion ALM software is about reporting and time for extraction of the data...The quality of reporting needs to improve."
GitLab is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 70 reviews while Polarion ALM is ranked 8th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 17 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Polarion ALM is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion ALM writes "Though needing an improvement in reporting and time for extraction of the data, its integration capabilities are good". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, SonarQube, AWS CodePipeline and Tekton, whereas Polarion ALM is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Codebeamer, PTC Integrity and Jama Connect. See our GitLab vs. Polarion ALM report.
See our list of best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Agile Planning Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
