Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cegid vs SAP SuccessFactors HCM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 16, 2025

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

Cegid
Ranking in Cloud HCM
19th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Talent Management (17th)
SAP SuccessFactors HCM
Ranking in Cloud HCM
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

HF
Project Manager, HRIS at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Optimize talent management with modular features but needs better reporting
There are difficulties regarding the reporting part. While we have some reporting functionalities, they are not powerful or deep. For instance, the coverage report on a specific effective date provides data effective on the day of the report, which is a significant limitation. Additionally, the available APIs, both inbound and outbound, are not well-developed, preventing the creation of accurate interfaces with other systems. There is also a need to review the reporting infrastructure to build a data lake that would allow customers to access data regardless of the effective date of the information. Moreover, the silos between the different modules need to be removed. Ideally, one would want a report that provides information at the same time from performance and compensation.
MS
Enterprise Architecht at RS Group plc
Increased onboarding efficiency and enhanced user engagement with comprehensive performance management
All features have been valuable, particularly as we are investigating whether to connect it with Talent Management. Currently, we have a solution with Degree, and we are considering moving it to SAP Talent Management. This would provide a single location to house everything, allowing all employees to use the same platform rather than two separate platforms. This also reduces integration expense and management costs. Different stakeholders benefit from various aspects of the interface and dashboards. Managers can examine their team members' skill sets. From an employee perspective, they can track their progress and match it with their objectives and goals. From an organizational perspective, we can maintain a comprehensive view when considering upskilling or other resource-related decisions. The dashboards are highly effective. The employee experience management tools have had a very positive impact on employee satisfaction and well-being within our organization.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The performance appraisal is the most valuable feature."
"Performance appraisal might be the most valuable feature for us."
"It helps to optimize some workflows and provides reporting capabilities."
"The most valuable features of Meta4 are payroll and resource recruitment. However, all of the features in the human resource system are useful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the payment engine."
"The most valuable feature is you can customize every type of payroll calculation that you have."
"The solution is very helpful as it allows us to optimize and consolidate all the data for talent management."
"The tool provides a lot of options."
"The employee experience management tools have had a very positive impact on employee satisfaction and well-being within our organization."
"The feature I appreciate the most about this solution is the integration with SAP S/4HANA system."
"The SAP SuccessFactors HCM tool is a fantastic platform to work with, offering end-to-end employee lifecycle coverage."
"SAP SuccessFactors HCM has positively impacted my customer's environment by ensuring they are digital; we promote using DocuSign for document signing and ensuring effective onboarding, and post-implementation we provide hyper-care and digital adoption reports after six months or a year to show how much more paperless and workflow-enabled their organization has become after SAP SuccessFactors HCM implementation."
"Using SAP SuccessFactors HCM analytics and insights helps my customers in data-driven decision-making."
 

Cons

"The first response usually lacks depth, and if it were just an HR user submitting tickets, the outcome might be poor."
"The HR portal, training model, and development career model could all use improvement. Stability and scalability should be improved as well."
"Meta4 could improve by allowing users to manage things by themself."
"In future releases, it would be useful to see reporting lines of all the team members in our business to understand who reports to whom."
"The HR portal, training model, and the development career model all need improvement."
"There are difficulties regarding the reporting part."
"training and performance could be improved."
"The user interface could be improved and the maintenance is complex when it comes to upgrades."
"The SAP SuccessFactors HCM has room for improvement in terms of product development nimbleness. Additionally, the speed of the application platform occasionally reduces, primarily due to data center related issues."
"It is very difficult to purchase SAP SuccessFactors HCM over here for smaller or medium-sized organizations, mainly because of the price."
"The pricing of the solution is very high concerning pricing, setup cost, and licensing of this tool."
"The main area for improvement would be implementing a better pricing model. It is expensive, and with people discussing Workday more frequently, SAP needs to compete by becoming more free-flowing and dynamic compared to traditional SAP systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Meta4 requires annual maintenance that needs to be paid for."
"From a cost perspective, I think this is a well-balanced option."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud HCM solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Retailer
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Insurance Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise11
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What advice do you have for others considering Cegid?
I would recommend Cegid for a small company. I rate the overall solution a six out of ten.
What needs improvement with Cegid?
There are difficulties regarding the reporting part. While we have some reporting functionalities, they are not powerful or deep. For instance, the coverage report on a specific effective date prov...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SAP SuccessFactors HCM?
The pricing of SAP SuccessFactors HCM is a bit expensive; its HCM without SuccessFactors was reasonable when it was on-site, but SuccessFactors is very expensive. On-premise HCM was good regarding ...
What needs improvement with SAP SuccessFactors HCM?
Pakistani policies need most of the customizations for SAP SuccessFactors HCM. I don't think Pakistanis should improve; our systems are not right. We should improve, not SAP. There should be some a...
What is your primary use case for SAP SuccessFactors HCM?
I researched SAP SuccessFactors HCM products on your website. I was the project manager for the implementation of SAP SuccessFactors HCM in my university. The implementation partner was Telemarks. ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

TalentSoft, Meta4
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aeroports de Paris, Arkadin, Ingenico Payment Services, Bollor_ Group, Bull, FDJ, Limagrain
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cegid vs. SAP SuccessFactors HCM and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.