DarwinBox vs MHR iTrent comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

DarwinBox
Ranking in Cloud HCM
16th
Average Rating
6.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Talent Management (23rd), HR Analytics Software (8th), Talent Acquisition (11th)
MHR iTrent
Ranking in Cloud HCM
23rd
Average Rating
4.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Benefits Administration (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Cloud HCM category, the mindshare of DarwinBox is 2.1%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MHR iTrent is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud HCM
Unique Categories:
Talent Management
1.9%
HR Analytics Software
2.8%
Benefits Administration
0.7%
 

Featured Reviews

Ayushee  Tiwari - PeerSpot reviewer
Oct 18, 2023
The product's servers, integration capabilities, and user interface needs improvement
DarwinBox is not at all a user-friendly product. DarwinBox is a product that needs to be made more user-friendly. DarwinBox's UI is not at all interactive and resembles some website that is made with HTML code, making it a very boring website. From an improvement perspective, DarwinBox's UI needs to be made better. There is no data integration possible with DarwinBox. DarwinBox is not a cloud-based product, and its servers are very messed up. The aforementioned areas concerning DarwinBox are aspects that I don't like and need to be considered for improvement in the future. In general, DrawinBox's servers, integration capabilities, and user interface should be improved. Every functionality that DarwinBox claims to provide to its users needs improvement.
SB
Aug 8, 2023
A scalable solution with good functionalities, but customer support needs to improve
We use the whole integrated payroll HR system. I'm more on the payroll side. They do not host us, but we host ourselves MHR iTrent's functionality and the payroll part are good. It was all set up before I started. Customer support and getting help from MHR iTrent are not great at all. MHR iTrent…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution that we used previously was very complex. As a result, without referring to the manuals and consulting an expert, it was difficult for a newly hired employee to navigate the platform. However, this is not the case with Darwinbox. It has a very intuitive user interface, and anyone can use it and implement it without having to use a guide or a walk through process. It's very simple."
"The most valuable features of the solution are organogram and position-based mapping."
"In our company, we use DarwinBox to maintain the data of our employees and for recruitment purposes."
"MHR iTrent's functionality and the payroll part are good."
"The retrospection feature within iTrent is really good and better than what some other software provides. It's really useful."
 

Cons

"The solution's API integration with third-party applications should be improved."
"Like most software, it has a base version, the vanilla, out-of-the-box version, and customization is required to match it to the unique processes of each company. The Darwinbox team seems to be having difficulty with the customization process. They have to be a little more mature to customize it as per every company's need."
"DarwinBox is not a stable solution...DarwinBox is not a scalable solution."
"MHR's customer service needs to improve. It's dreadful at the moment. They're not very customer-focused."
"Customer support and getting help from MHR iTrent are not great at all."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company makes some yearly payments towards the licensing costs attached to DarwinBox."
"Compared with SuccessFactors, there is no major difference in DarwinBox's cost."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud HCM solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
23%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
6%
Educational Organization
22%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about DarwinBox?
The most valuable features of the solution are organogram and position-based mapping.
What needs improvement with DarwinBox?
The solution's API integration with third-party applications should be improved. There are some issues when it comes to integrating the solution with the SAP system and banking single channels. Mul...
What is your primary use case for DarwinBox?
We use DarwinBox for payroll and the complete hire-to-fire cycle of employees.
What do you like most about MHR iTrent?
MHR iTrent's functionality and the payroll part are good.
What needs improvement with MHR iTrent?
I'm not particularly happy with it if I'm being honest. But that is more due to the service provided by MHR rather than the software iTrent. I would like to improve the customer service in particul...
What is your primary use case for MHR iTrent?
We use it as an integrated HR payroll system. Any queries regarding the system not doing what it should are usually about the service provided by MHR—the customer service, the responses, and cases ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
MidlandHR iTrent, iTrent
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Myntra, GVK BIO, Bisleri, Times Internet, Delhivery, Aarti
Brighton and Hove City Council, Cafcass, Capel Manor College, Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS, City and Islington College, City West Housing, Coventry University, Denbighshire County Council, Dudley College, Dyfed Powys Police Force, East Durham College
Find out what your peers are saying about DarwinBox vs. MHR iTrent and other solutions. Updated: July 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.