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

Dataloader.io vs IBM Cloud Pak for Data comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Dataloader.io
Ranking in Data Integration
45th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Cloud Pak for Data
Ranking in Data Integration
26th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Data Virtualization (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Data Integration category, the mindshare of Dataloader.io is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Cloud Pak for Data is 1.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Integration Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Cloud Pak for Data1.8%
Dataloader.io0.3%
Other97.9%
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Aditi Bhardwaj - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides an ease of access and an automated mapping feature
We need help with large data migrations. It only works well for a few thousand records or less than a million records. Above that, we need to look for alternative solutions. They could provide automated transformation or mapping features around 10 to 15 independent data objects. We could have a default mark or limit of free usage for standard objects. It will be helpful. Additionally, we can have more integrations with large data volumes as we need a lot of exercises to handle the files in case of complex sites.
Michelle Leslie - PeerSpot reviewer
Starts strong with data management capabilities but needs a demo database
What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated. There are so many components to data management, and more often than not, people understand one thing really well. They may understand DataStage and how to move data around, but they do not see the impact of moving data incorrectly. They also do not see the impact of everyone understanding a piece of data in the same way. I would love Cloud Pak to come with a demo database that illustrates the different components of data management in a logical way, so I can see the whole picture instead of just the area I'm specializing in. It would be great if Cloud Pak, from a data modeling point of view, allowed us to import our PDMs, for example. It would be ideal to import and create business terms in Cloud Pak. The PEA would be great to create the technical data. The association between the business and the technical metadata could then be automated by pulling it through from your ACE models. The data modeling component is available in Cloud Pak. Additionally, when it comes to Cloud Pak, even though it has the NextGen DataStage built into it, there is Cloud Pak for data integration as well. Currently, I do not think we have a full enough understanding of how CP4D and CP4I can enhance each other.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"DataLoader is cost-effective since it is free."
"he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access."
"I find DataLoader's ability to easily integrate with external keys valuable, which is a bit more challenging with DBM."
"Cloud Pak is a very, very, very good system."
"I love the way that I can start at a very basic level with my data management journey by capturing my policies, justifying my data, and putting them into different categories to say this is data relating to individuals, for example, or data relating to geography."
"DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources."
"One of Cloud Pak's best features is the Watson Knowledge Catalog, which helps you implement data governance."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Cloud Pak for Data is the Modeler flows. The ability to develop models using a graphical approach and the capability to connect to various sources, as well as the data virtualization capabilities, allow me to easily access and utilize data that is dispersed across different sources."
"The most valuable features are data virtualization and reporting."
"The most valuable features of IBM Cloud Pak for Data are the Watson Studio, where we can initiate more groups and write code. Additionally, Watson Machine Learning is available with many other services, such as APIs which you can plug the machine learning models."
"It is a scalable solution, and we have had no issues with its scalability in our company. I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions."
"Dataloader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than Dataloader."
"We need help with large data migrations. It only works well for a few thousand records or less than a million records."
"Cloud Pak would be improved with integration with cloud service providers like Cloudera."
"The solution could have more connectors."
"There is a solution that is part of IBM Cloud Pak for Data called Watson OpenScale. It is used to monitor the deployed models for the quality and fairness of the results. This is one area that needs a lot of improvement."
"One challenge I'm facing with IBM Cloud Pak for Data is native features have been decommissioned, such as XML input and output. Too many changes have been made, and my company has around one hundred thousand mappings, so my team has been putting more effort into alternative ways to do things. Another area for improvement in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is that it's more complicated to shift from on-premise to the cloud. Other vendors provide secure agents that easily connect with your existing setup. Still, with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, you have to perform connection migration steps, upgrade to the latest version, etc., which makes it more complicated, especially as my company has XML-based mappings. Still, the XML input and output capabilities of IBM Cloud Pak for Data have been discontinued, so I'd like IBM to bring that back."
"The setup cost is very expensive. The cost depends on the pieces of the solution I'm using, how much data I have, and whether it's on the cloud or on-prem."
"One thing that bugs me is how much infrastructure Cloud Pak requires for the initial deployment. It doesn't allow you to start small. The smallest permitted deployment is too big. It's a huge problem that prevents us from implementing the solution in many scenarios."
"The interface could improve because sometimes it becomes slow. Sometimes there is a delay between clicks when using the software, which can make the development process slow. It can take a few seconds to complete one action, and then a few more seconds to do the next one."
"The technical support could be a little better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is inexpensive and economical."
"IBM Cloud Pak for Data is expensive. If we include the training time and the machine learning, it's expensive. The cost of the execution is more reasonable."
"Cloud Pak's cost is a little high."
"The solution is expensive."
"For the licensing of the solution, there is a yearly payment that needs to be made. Also, since it is expensive, cost-wise, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten."
"The solution's pricing is competitive with that of other vendors."
"I don't have the exact licensing cost for IBM Cloud Pak for Data, as my company is still finalizing requirements, including monthly, yearly, and three-year licensing fees. Still, on a scale of one to five, I'd rate it a three because, compared to other vendors, it's more complicated."
"I think that this product is too expensive for smaller companies."
"It's quite expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
28%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Dataloader.io?
he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Dataloader.io?
Dataloader.io is cost-effective, particularly since it is free.
What needs improvement with Dataloader.io?
DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than DataLoader.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
The setup cost is very expensive. The cost depends on the pieces of the solution I'm using, how much data I have, and whether it's on the cloud or on-prem.
What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated. There are so many components to data...
What is your primary use case for IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
My primary use case for Cloud Pak is that I am the reference Data steward for the Africa regions in the banks where I work. My main objective is to capture the reference data in Caltech or Data and...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Cloud Pak for Data
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UCSF, Box, CareFusion, Unilever, Hershey's
Qatar Development Bank, GuideWell, Skanderborg Music Festival
Find out what your peers are saying about Dataloader.io vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Data and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.