No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CA Deliver vs QlikView comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

CA Deliver
Ranking in Reporting
33rd
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
QlikView
Ranking in Reporting
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
163
Ranking in other categories
Embedded BI (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Reporting category, the mindshare of CA Deliver is 0.9%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QlikView is 3.8%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Reporting Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
QlikView3.8%
CA Deliver0.9%
Other95.3%
Reporting
 

Featured Reviews

it_user837525 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer (Sr. level II) at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Gives us one repository for various output formats and retention periods
A common theme with all CA products is they state compatibility with new technologies when it has not yet been proven. Much like other technology companies that have fallen into this trap, let feature and compatibly releases be controlled by the technical group, instead of the marketing and/or management people. I cite the example that CA mainframe products were deemed to be compatible with Extended Address Volumes (EAV) - larger sized disk volumes - when they were not. I have been doing this for 37 years and see it all too often, sometimes to the detriment of the company itself (Storage Technology Corp. and its Iceberg array comes to mind).
SG
Financial Controller with task of Business Intelligence Implementation at a wholesaler/distributor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Daily invoice analytics has become streamlined and complex data modeling is now simplified
We are not using analytics features and possibly predictive analytics and forecasting features in QlikView, although they are available. QlikView is very flexible, but we are currently using only tabular presentation of data because that is what we need. Presenting a large volume of data in QlikView with graphics can be overwhelming for the majority of people who want to see a lot of information in one picture. It would be beneficial to have AI or ML features in QlikView. However, I think they will decommission QlikView, and AI features are already available in Qlik Sense, so you would need to migrate to that platform.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Extremely stable and reliable, and easy to install."
"Having one repository for various output formats and retention periods. Provides the flexibility to establish hundreds of different retention entries, based upon business need, and then group the like retention period outputs together on the same media. It is very efficient."
"The benefits are that it keeps their information for over 40 to 50 years, so in essence it's a digital bank for customer information."
"Flexibility of report configuration; allows for quick and simple amendments to definitions."
"With QV, literally all departments across the company have started owning data in terms of getting hands on data, knowledge about data, how it is built up, and the ability to slice and dice, add, expand, or decrease the size or granularity of their own reports."
"It's user-friendly and easy to use, even for new users."
"Completeness in functionality and user friendliness are the product’s most valuable features."
"Customer Service: 10/10 - it's perfect, very fast and very good support."
"Associative model - no more cubes."
"The user interface and dashboards are very good."
"ROI is much better compared to BO because deployment time and cost are both reduced."
"Its ability to build, very quickly, very complicated models."
 

Cons

"I work with the developers so I get what I want built into the project."
"Needs ability to allow export to xls/pdf, etc. (Note: this is available in add-on product CA – OM Web Viewer)."
"A common theme with all CA products is they state compatibility with new technologies when it has not yet been proven. I cite the example that CA mainframe products were deemed to be compatible with Extended Address Volumes (EAV) - larger sized disk volumes - when they were not."
"Improvement in collaboration, between that and publishing of reports and publishing of models."
"I would like to see improvements to scheduled reporting and the capability to email the user."
"Data Science."
"The tool is expensive in Turkey."
"It is well know that the ETL is quite far away from leading products like Data Stage, Informatica and others."
"Although Qliktech's road map clearly states that QlikView has a long way to go, most of the R&D effort seems to be benefiting Qlik Sense."
"QlikView's ability to embed custom visualisation is not a great experience."
"The solution should be mobile-responsive. It should also include drag-and-drop and slice-and-dice features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"​Pricing is reasonable, licensing model suitable for large enterprises."
"My firm got the product at a cheap price, but in general, I believe that the product is a bit costly."
"It is quite expensive, rating at around nine out of ten on a cost scale."
"Qlik is fairly high in terms of pricing."
"The setup costs for QlikView are fair as are the yearly maintenance fees. The licensing becomes a bit more expensive and requires some planning for onboarding."
"QlikView is more expensive than one of its competitors."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"QlikView pricing and licensing is on the high side for a small sized company, but it's competitive among its peers."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one being low price and ten being high price, I rate pricing a four."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Reporting solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user79932 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager - BI Head with 5,001-10,000 employees
Feb 4, 2015
Comparison of SAP BO, Tableau, QlikView, Cognos, Microsoft, OBIEE and Pentaho
1. SAP BO/BI Enterprise scalability Security Ease of use Semantic layer 2. Tableau Visualization Data discovery Turnaround time 3. IBM Cognos Enterprise scalability Security In-memory feature 4. MS BI - Flexibility 5. Pentaho - Open source but still enterprise grade 6. QlikView Data…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise76
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for QlikView?
I would rate the pricing for QlikView as not cheap, but it is reasonable.
What needs improvement with QlikView?
We are not using analytics features and possibly predictive analytics and forecasting features in QlikView, although they are available. QlikView is very flexible, but we are currently using only t...
What is your primary use case for QlikView?
The primary use case involves analyzing data on a daily invoice level with QlikView. Building metrics using simple language, similar to what you have in Excel, is what I have found most valuable in...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ERGO
Canon, Gatorade, Amcor, Panasonic, Fila, Cambridge University Hospitals, Global Retail Bank, North Yorkshire Police department, Lanoo Group Publishers, and AonGroep Nederland.
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Deliver vs. QlikView and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.