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

Deltek CostPoint vs IFS Cloud Platform 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

Deltek CostPoint
Ranking in ERP
32nd
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IFS Cloud Platform
Ranking in ERP
12th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
CRM (20th), Customer Experience Management (6th), Field Service Management (1st), Help Desk Software (12th), Activity Based Costing Software (7th), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) (2nd), Local Government CRM (9th), IT Asset Management (10th), IT Service Management (ITSM) (11th), License Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the ERP category, the mindshare of Deltek CostPoint is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IFS Cloud Platform is 2.5%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ERP Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IFS Cloud Platform2.5%
Deltek CostPoint0.5%
Other97.0%
ERP
 

Featured Reviews

BS
Good solution for finance in general but falls short on the manufacturing side
There is room for improvement when it comes to reporting and the manufacturing piece in general. I would like to see more of a complete solution with the operations end of the business, namely the quality management system and the production pieces. It's very good at project costing, cost accounting, accounting and finance in general. Where it falls short is the manufacturing side. Overall, the solution is very difficult to use and learn. The learning curve is difficult. Also, the GUI and user interface are not intuitive.
Thangaraj Ramasamy - PeerSpot reviewer
Has supported project management and business customization through strong modular flexibility
The cloud feature in IFS Cloud Platform is predominantly valuable, especially the enterprise asset management module, which IFS has very good business into, along with strong finance, project management, and supply chain management modules; these are the major modules that are performing well with IFS, and the cloud options along with user-friendly customizations for any technical developments are additional advantages. The integration of IoT with IFS Cloud Platform is performing well, enabling us to integrate with predominantly any third party through the standard inbuilt connectors that are readily available, and if we need to customize the integration, we can certainly do that too.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability of the solution is fine."
"The most valuable features of IFS Applications are their intuitiveness and ease of use. The navigations are also straightforward, which makes it easy to train users. The feedback I always receive is that it is very user-friendly."
"The product is quite flexible."
"Having a young talented programmer, during the six years of use, we were able to save around 75 000 EUR preparing simple modifications using customization rather than ordering them in IFS / Partner."
"The platform is reliable and stable."
"The main reason for the ERP project was to bring together our fourteen sites, which had until then worked in separate silos."
"A high level of ERP can be handled in IFS."
"IFS has been completely rebuilt, modernized, and cloud-based so we don't need bulky software installations."
"The workflow of the solution is very good."
 

Cons

"Overall, the solution is very difficult to use and learn. The learning curve is difficult. Also, the GUI and user interface are not intuitive."
"IFS Applications is not robust enough to handle high-volume transactions, so it's not suitable for larger enterprises."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex...The technical support my company receives from the implementation partners of the solution is not that great."
"The integration is a bit complex, and post-implementation support services need to be improved. They have a service center based out of Sri Lanka. The support aspect is good, but the response time is a little slower than we anticipated. In the next release, it would be better if Warehouse Management could be improvised. They have a product line that's a data warehouse management system, but it's still premature and requires a bit of enhancement."
"I have seen that one of the areas that my company has identified for improvement might be the rental management capabilities within the solution."
"It would be ideal if, in the future, the product could incorporate IoT and blockchain elements. We'd like to explore more of these types of features going forward."
"Ability to place approval check-points in the custom workflow, so clients can decide what they want it."
"The support provided by IFS Applications has room for improvement. I'm based in Poland, and when my company had an issue, finding people from IFS to give my company the support it needed was difficult."
"Aspects of HR and payroll could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"IFS Applications are competitive in terms of pricing compared to other vendors, such as SAP, Oracle, and Epicor. They are generally cheaper, especially for licensing costs."
"It is better to buy implementation services from IFS than from partners"
"Pricing is an area that could be improved. They could be more competitive."
"There's an additional yearly cost for support."
"The pricing of the solution may appear to be expensive for smaller companies with only tens of users; however, for larger and mid-size industrial companies, IFS is able to win deals and the pricing is competitive in the market."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"We pay for a license to use the solution, which is not very expensive."
"Ask for all-inclusive pricing, as they are pretty flexible if you ask for custom models."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ERP solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Healthcare Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about IFS Applications?
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten since it is an extremely scalable solution that can be used for various use cases with thousands of users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IFS Applications?
The product is reasonably priced. The costs are justified by the value provided, considering the comprehensive features and minimal need for customization. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with IFS Applications?
I am not able to recall much about batch. Documentation-wise, they need more. There is not much available online, and the documentation availability is on the lower side compared to other products,...
 

Also Known As

CostPoint
IFS Applications, Assyst, IFS Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Dougherty & Associates Inc, Groth Design Group, CDH Partners, Fieldstone Architecture, FKP Architects, Group2 Architecture Engineering Ltd., PHH ARC, Rios Clementi Hale Studios, R.J. Burnside & Associates Ltd., Seccuris, Stendel + Reich Architects, The Thompson Rosemount Group Inc.
China Airlines, Electrolux Group, Babcock, Cimcorp, Sky, Multiplex, Veolia. 
Find out what your peers are saying about SAP, Microsoft, Infor and others in ERP. Updated: August 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.