We performed a comparison between Ardoq and MEGA HOPEX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool is very simple and intuitive to use."
"We use the portfolio management feature heavily."
"The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it's completely possible to do so."
"Every module sets up the same information in a unique repository."
"You do not need to be a professional of enterprise modeling to contribute to the enrichment and improvement of the enterprise repository."
"Customer support is fantastic. They are very helpful whenever we get on the line with the support team."
"This is a complete package with all of the functionality that we need."
"The dashboard on the homepage makes for an enhanced view at a glance of the various work functions applicable to the user."
"The training environment wasn't very intuitive, but maybe with more use, it will get better."
"Scalability as a standalone system is good, given the information that has been described inside Ardoq. But not the scalability as a third-party system or with integration with other systems. Because in this direction, the scalability is about zero for Ardoq."
"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."
"MEGA HOPEX's initial setup could be easier. The newer version is better but they still need to improve the process. The deployment took approximately four to eight hours."
"We have a very close relationship with MEGA representatives in Mexico, and we ask them why they don't offer impact analysis. For example, we have a server in the center and provide the client a view of what's in the peripheral area, like one cluster, application, process area, and services. We want to offer our clients that level of visibility with HOPEX."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"I cannot recall coming across any missing features."
"Standardization is lacking. The Operational Risk Function will be more effective if it at a default level follows established Basel standards for Loss categorization, Risk Assessments, Risk Event categorization, etc."
"In my experience, I've encountered difficulties with consuming custom packages in MEGA HOPEX, which leads to redundant work when deploying them to production. This is an area where improvement is needed. While version six offers better UI and UX, resolving this issue should be a priority. I believe it's important to fully explore MEGA HOPEX's capabilities before suggesting new ones."
"It has a data domain where we load our data objects onto the tool but doesn't provide data governance capabilities such as cleansing or validating data."
Ardoq is ranked 12th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 2 reviews while MEGA HOPEX is ranked 5th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 36 reviews. Ardoq is rated 7.6, while MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Ardoq writes "Provides stable performance and scalability but not intuitive for data modeling". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Easy to use and robust with good features". Ardoq is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, BiZZdesign HoriZZon, ADOIT and erwin Data Modeler by Quest, whereas MEGA HOPEX is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA and Visio. See our Ardoq vs. MEGA HOPEX report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management 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.
