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

Epicor iScala 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

Epicor iScala
Ranking in ERP
37th
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IFS Cloud Platform
Ranking in ERP
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
CRM (29th), Customer Experience Management (9th), Field Service Management (2nd), Help Desk Software (16th), Activity Based Costing Software (10th), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) (4th), Local Government CRM (11th), IT Asset Management (12th), IT Service Management (ITSM) (16th), License Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the ERP category, the mindshare of Epicor iScala is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IFS Cloud Platform is 2.4%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ERP Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IFS Cloud Platform2.4%
Epicor iScala0.7%
Other96.9%
ERP
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2379783 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Law Enforcement Executive at a comms service provider with 201-500 employees
Offers inventory management, basic ERP functions but outdated interface
The interface looks a bit outdated. Epicor acquired iScala, which was originally developed in Sweden. I'm unsure if their intention is to eventually replace iScala with their primary Epicor ERP or continue developing iScala. Initially, it seemed they might replace it, but it appears iScala will remain a separate product.
reviewer2268153 - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Operations Engineer
Integrated planning has improved production scheduling and now reduces downtime and costs
The biggest friction point I have run into with IFS Cloud Platform is user adoption, which has been the biggest challenge, as different users in the organization need to get accustomed to the new processes after years of using spreadsheets and legacy systems, requiring training and a mindset shift, along with challenging data migration and process standardization. My advice to someone considering IFS Cloud Platform with a similar workflow is to spend sufficient time understanding and standardizing their business processes before implementing it, as the technology is very powerful, but the real value comes when processes, data, and teams are all aligned. I would rate my overall experience with IFS Cloud Platform as a 9 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The accounting, purchasing, and basic ERP functions work well. But they are a little bit older, but they work for us. The inventory management is good and necessary for any company that manages stock for production or services."
"Individual user profiles that can be configured as templates to minimize data entry."
"IFS Applications is very user-friendly and easy to deploy, and it's suitable for small and medium enterprises."
"Feature-wise, I like the way it provides inventory details...It is a stable solution."
"IFS has been completely rebuilt, modernized, and cloud-based so we don't need bulky software installations."
"The most valuable feature is the distribution module."
"The best feature is the maintenance module, which is essentially an industry-specific workflow designed with a manufacturing module as per industry standards. It's very precise and specific without having complex functionalities. It's straightforward. Field Service Management is definitely a wonderful product that IFS has developed because it caters to field services. The energy and utility sectors can answer their business needs using the software."
"The platform is reliable and stable."
"The product is quite flexible."
 

Cons

"We're facing challenges with iScala in the public sector, specifically healthcare. The system doesn't have sufficient support for the complexities of managing payments for doctors, nurses, and other healthcare staff."
"The initial setup or implementation was a little more complex than I expected."
"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."
"The biggest friction point I have run into with IFS Cloud Platform is user adoption, which has been the biggest challenge, as different users in the organization need to get accustomed to the new processes after years of using spreadsheets and legacy systems, requiring training and a mindset shift, along with challenging data migration and process standardization."
"The initial implementation was more complex than expected."
"Customization can only be done by IFS and not by the clients themselves."
"There are certain digital features that need to be incorporated, such as IOP."
"Documentation-wise, they need more."
"The solution's reporting tools still require improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to local ERP solutions, it's on the higher side."
"We pay for a license to use the solution, which is not very expensive."
"Pricing is an area that could be improved. They could be more competitive."
"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."
"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."
"The additional cost that comes with the solution includes the overhead of the people who are trying to fix the tool issues. These people are trying to reproduce the issue and report it to the technical support and testing with them which is huge. It is the cost of quality in the end."
"Compared to SAP, the pricing for IFS Applications was very affordable. People using the solution would find that it's worth the money."
"It is better to buy implementation services from IFS than from partners"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ERP solutions are best for your needs.
905,526 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
There are features that came up during implementation that we are not actually using today, such as field service management (FSM), because we do not have any field technicians visiting customer si...
What is your primary use case for IFS Applications?
My main use case for IFS Cloud Platform is for production planning, where I typically use it for production scheduling and for inventory management. When I open IFS Cloud Platform, the first thing ...
 

Also Known As

iScala
IFS Applications, Assyst, IFS Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

PLP Thailand, Crystal Jade, Mahajak Industry Co Ltd, CRS Electronics, AGM Container Controls, Pacific Insight Electronics
China Airlines, Electrolux Group, Babcock, Cimcorp, Sky, Multiplex, Veolia. 
Find out what your peers are saying about SAP, Oracle, Microsoft and others in ERP. Updated: June 2026.
905,526 professionals have used our research since 2012.