IDERA ER/Studio vs MEGA HOPEX comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IDERA ER/Studio
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
34
Ranking in other categories
Database Development and Management (14th)
MEGA HOPEX
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (8th), GRC (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of IDERA ER/Studio is 5.8%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 6.8%, up from 6.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management
Unique Categories:
Database Development and Management
1.8%
Business Process Design
2.7%
GRC
1.3%
 

Featured Reviews

AndersonMoura - PeerSpot reviewer
Oct 19, 2022
The solution has important reverse engineering features, but it needs a single sign-on feature
With ER/Studio, the roadmap to send us new versions with the new database is slow. I think it could allow us to test and use new database versions faster. Sometimes we get new functionalities like, for example, the Collibra integration. We receive these new functionalities, and sometimes we start to test them and we find errors that we need to correct by talking with tech support. I think they allow functionalities to be released before the full tests for catching and correcting errors are completed. My other point is about the team server. We're using the web portal, and the interface is not so good. The client was modified, and we have the new version. It's good. The client is good to us, but the web portal is using the old UI. It's not as modern, and it's limited. We found that the new version is slow when compared to the older version. We are trying to investigate what component is causing the slowness, because you have the client access, the repository, the API, the team server, and the web portal. Getting a single sign-on feature is very important to us.
WV
Mar 18, 2024
A cloud product for data governance and information management
People should have more training about the product. It's a very versatile product. It can be complicated for an average user to use. People with several years of experience working with these tools know how to navigate it. However, it can be overwhelming for a new user. The training materials and learning process need improvement. The product is quite robust. There is no fault related to internal functions and capabilities. The solution needs a clearer licensing model and a transparent method to understand where the licenses are held. Licenses are initially assigned to to people, making tracing difficult. If you require 50 concurrent users across an organization of 1000, you need to pinpoint and maintain who uses them. It becomes very challenging without that internal capability.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The reverse engineering is the most important feature."
"This application does a lot of things, as do competitor products, but the main reason to go with this product was the ability to create many automations, where we can improve our work and our process."
"The data modeling module is important to me because I am a database developer and designer... It's very fast, reliable, up-to-date, so easy to use, smooth."
"It's easy to model and has a user-friendly interface. I like the team portal because, once we upload, the entire team can see the model."
"The most important features are logical and physical models that we can compare and develop. Also, the Data Dictionary can be created out of your studio. Finally, database schemas help understand the logic that's behind the scene, behind the SQL tables. Especially when there are a lot of them, the schemas help everyone understand the business processes."
"Using this product has improved the way we maintain our models because they have a place where we can keep all of them, and they can be viewed using the web interface."
"The data modeling and reverse engineering features are most important to us."
"It's much easier to develop the database structure and change it on the fly, rather than doing it manually in SQL Server itself. That saves time."
"The solution itself was easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of MEGA HOPEX is the publication method for static websites. You can generate the whole database into a static website. Additionally, in the new tabular entry, you don't have to put objects or links, you can go and fill a tab and the MEGA HOPEX will generate an object for you in a simple way."
"The most valuable features of MEGA HOPEX are the seamless VPA module and the good user experience. There are built-in connections that provide integration with other platforms, such as ServiceNow. There is a lot of customization available allowing a lot of freedom. The solution is updated frequently adding new features. For example, the feature GraphQL can be integrated into other solutions, such as ManageEngine for ITSM solutions. You are able to use GraphQL to connect APIs and query the APIs."
"MEGA offers a more integrated GRC platform to facilitate enhanced coordination between the functions of Risk, Compliance, and Internal Audit on a single platform solution - HOPEX."
"What I find the most valuable is the process workflow. It is really good."
"The support experience in Latin America is great."
"We have many use cases for this solution but the feature I have found most valuable is the IT Portfolio Management module."
"Customer support is fantastic. They are very helpful whenever we get on the line with the support team."
 

Cons

"The number of options can be overwhelming at times. That is not necessarily a bad thing but for a newbie, it can be daunting."
"We would always like to see Repository performance improve, checking in and checking out."
"I would like to see better documentation/help for the Data Architect tool. Creation of tutorials would be nice, as there are some features which are not as clearly defined as they should be."
"The visual presentation is a little too colorful and seems that it is dumbed down."
"I'd like the ability to debug the errors ourselves instead of having to call them. There are certain types of errors that, I wouldn't say they come up regularly, but when you have an error it is very often the same type of error. Knowing that it's a Type III or Type I, it would be nice to have some kind of debugging facility for us to use to find out where the problem that threw that error occurs. That would be a really cool feature."
"when there are some links to the external databases, if this database is not structured it is not uploaded. It gives me errors and I cannot see the view that was created on this structure and I cannot change those views, even manually. It skips the views. I have to ignore those views. I cannot re-upload them because it gives me an error."
"The solution could be sped up, as it is a little slow (e.g., when it's doing its database compare)."
"I would like to upload, a database with about 3,000 tables. It takes so much time and, finally, it freezes the whole solution so that I actually cannot work with that environment. For the data warehouse, it's fine because I have 20 or 30 tables. It works fine. But, when I reverse-engineer the database with 3,000 tables, it freezes and it's hard to upload and reverse-engineer such environments in ER/Studio."
"An area for improvement in MEGA HOPEX is its vast learning curve. The tool is also heavy, so that's a pain point. MEGA HOPEX is also tricky to use if you don't train for many hours."
"It would be great if this solution could integrate with other tools such as ITSM (ServiceNow) or CMDB."
"They do tend to push people to their professional services, instead of helping the customers with their problems. I understand this is their business. At the same time, however, they need to work on fact sheets or offer some program to help the customers who want to implement it themselves and to make it run properly in their environment."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"I cannot recall coming across any missing features."
"We would like to see integration with other products, such as being able to use our workflow with SharePoint and Microsoft Office."
"Lacking more out of the box integrations."
"This product is expensive and would be improved by lowering its price."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As an individual user, the renewal is a little costly."
"Pricing is on point, but do your due diligence - not every developer needs the tool."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is bad and ten is good, I would rate the licensing cost as a seven or eight. It's not too expensive for us."
"At my previous company using ER/Studio, a database compare took four hours before using the product and 15 minutes after using the product."
"I feel the product's pricing is a good value."
"Pricing is expensive and on the higher-end."
"It is priced fairly. It's around the same as erwin and other competitors' costs."
"I am currently using the trial version, but this solution is definitely worth considering for the price point."
"The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"The pricing depends on the number of licenses purchased."
"I've been told that MEGA HOPEX is very expensive, which is why small organizations dismiss the tool. It's complex and costly versus other simpler and cheaper solutions."
"The price of the MEGA HOPEX license could improve, it is expensive. The license key for business process analysis and IT architecture is approximately €10,000. This price is fixed, it's not a subscription or cloud-based version. It is a one-time price."
"If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive."
"The tool is relatively expensive."
"MEGA HOPEX's licensing costs are yearly."
"The product has a high cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
38%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
6%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IDERA ER/Studio?
The solution's reporting could be improved because the report writer is terrible. Writing definitions and not being able to generate a nice report to view is useless. To me, that's a huge problem.
Any experience with Strategic Project Portfolio Management Solutions?
Hi @Cheryl Joseph ​Looking at the crossover between Project and Portfolio management with EA, then Planview could be a good choice. If looking at Portfolio Management from an EA perspective then Le...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MEGA HOPEX?
The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features.
 

Also Known As

IDERA ER Studio, ER/Studio, ER/Studio Enterprise Team Edition
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Newmont Mining, Entrust, Accolade, TalkTalk, Catalina, Protective Life, NTT Data, dir systèmes, Microsoft; American Express, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Coriant, Fedex, GlaxoSmithKline, PepsiCo, Prudential, Wells Fargo
Aetna, Fannie Mae, M&T Bank, Glatfelter Insurance Group, Zions Management Services Company, The College Board, Baxter Credit Union, AXA Financial, Missouri Department of Conservation, New York State OTDA, MEG Energy Corp, Walgreens, Procter & Gamble, Biogen Idec, Gilead Sciences, Organic Valley, Trinity Health, Nissan and Ford
Find out what your peers are saying about IDERA ER/Studio vs. MEGA HOPEX and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.