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

MEGA HOPEX vs erwin Evolve comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 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

erwin Evolve
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
14th
Ranking in Business Process Design
21st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
MEGA HOPEX
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
3rd
Ranking in Business Process Design
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
GRC (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of erwin Evolve is 3.4%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 5.5%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
MEGA HOPEX5.5%
erwin Evolve3.4%
Other91.1%
Enterprise Architecture Management
 

Featured Reviews

Asish Sahu - PeerSpot reviewer
SPM at Infosys
The reverse engineering capabilities are quite useful.
Evolve is primarily focused on the entity's licenses diagrams, but it would be nice if erwin could integrate case development, so that it shows the ER diagram plus certain inputs on the use cases and how the data is used. That deviates somewhat from the overall scope, so maybe they could call it a different product.
AB
Administrator at a healthcare company with 51-200 employees
Supports process modeling and customization but needs better reporting flexibility and UI improvements
As an administrator, I would improve MEGA HOPEX by adding a WYSIWYG feature for building reports, which would be very helpful. Additionally, I would want reporting customization from the front end web application, not only from the Windows app, which is the customizer. If all changes could be made in the web application, that would be beneficial because every time we need to request access to the server, it takes time in large organizations and involves multiple levels of approvals from cybersecurity and IT security, which can block the project. Regarding dashboards in MEGA HOPEX, they could definitely be better. Having something similar to ARIS would make it easier to build dashboards, providing a what-you-see-is-what-you-get experience, allowing me to drag and drop elements, configure them, and test queries. Moreover, RFQL language is not common, so in MEGA HOPEX, I need to learn RFQL querying. In terms of additional features for MEGA HOPEX, I would appreciate more features for workflows. There are limitations in customizing the email notifications sent during workflows. When creating a workflow, I can configure actions and customize the text, but not the header and footer. Therefore, all emails from the tool come with a MEGA HOPEX header. In large organizations like BPM COE, we want to have our own logo, header, and footer in those emails, but this is not configurable, which I find limiting. I would appreciate easier features to customize workflows and create workflows.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the most valuable features is the website that sits on top of the database. There's a database of objects and how they are related, and you can make views and diagrams and visual elements out of that information on the website. The website is the part that is called Evolve and we use the Evolve Designer and publish the website out to our employees. They can click around and navigate and search, etc."
"The feature that stands out for me is the ease of configuring objects and the screens to show them. It's really easy to add a new type of object in this reference. Creating a new type of object, using it, and evolving it a little bit in terms of what we can document about it are the main features that made us decide to use this provider."
"The ability to share and collaborate on the solution is its most valuable feature."
"We can efficiently deploy business models into the databases and generate SQL scripts."
"Forward and reverse engineering were valuable features."
"Support for a broad range of data sources from relational to big data to the Cloud."
"Workgroup Repository collection of data models allows research across models without worry about platform incompatibilities and provides easy KPIs about corporate data assets."
"Evolve's reverse engineering ability is quite useful."
"MEGA HOPEX has extensive modeling capabilities and can be modeled in different ways."
"The initial setup was straightforward. With configuration, customizing or prepping the data and deployment, it took about one year to set up. We only needed two people to deploy and maintain the solution: one business architect and someone who specializes in customization and operations."
"The most valuable features of MEGA HOPEX are the seamless VPA module and the good user experience. There are built-in connections that provide integration with other platforms, such as ServiceNow. There is a lot of customization available allowing a lot of freedom. The solution is updated frequently adding new features. For example, the feature GraphQL can be integrated into other solutions, such as ManageEngine for ITSM solutions. You are able to use GraphQL to connect APIs and query the APIs."
"What I find the most valuable is the process workflow. It is really good."
"As a data governance leader, I am looking to understand the capabilities of Mega for data governance, such as data awareness, business glossary, data catalog, and some business rules or management."
"The most valuable feature for this solution is the automatic updating and propagation of changes across the system."
"It is very interactive."
"You do not need to be a professional of enterprise modeling to contribute to the enrichment and improvement of the enterprise repository."
 

Cons

"Add some ability to do conditional Visualization on the models and in reports (some ideas) – maybe as a specialized Theme or Diagram or Display."
"They have improved the search engine a little bit but it can always be improved more. The more data you put inside it, the more you want to use it."
"I feel that the UML drawing capability needs to be improved."
"The solution's integration capabilities with other tools in our system has not been all that well done. We have people who use ARIS, who use System Architect and, of course, Visio. erwin has very limited ways to import and export from those kinds of tools. It's not a very easy thing to do."
"I would like it to be easier to make changes and then deploy them into production, especially when you have multiple web servers or front-ends. It would be nice to make a change and then have it propagate to the production servers in a more automated fashion."
"What they need to do is to consolidate more of their products. For example, I was just looking and I couldn't figure out what erwin DT is. It's on the website but it would help if they could put information together and make it more clear as to what products they have and how they work with other things."
"The way that we are using it for application management, we have several KPIs. We want to follow and monitor them regarding a number of solutions. We cannot calculate this today. We would like real-time calculations along with the KPIs in order to improve the user experience. We would like the tool to be able to display this, not only as signals, but as charts."
"Business process modelling could be improved."
"Standardization is lacking. The Operational Risk Function will be more effective if it at a default level follows established Basel standards for Loss categorization, Risk Assessments, Risk Event categorization, etc."
"MEGA HOPEX's problem is that it is expensive, but it's a fantastic tool."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"The data layer might be the weakest point for MEGA HOPEX."
"The tool usability is weak and it also has a high learning curve."
"We would like to see integration with other products, such as being able to use our workflow with SharePoint and Microsoft Office."
"This product is expensive and would be improved by lowering its price."
"Lacking more out of the box integrations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"On a yearly basis, our licensing costs are 50,000 euro. There are no additional costs because we are on a SaaS model."
"Unless you are a one person shop – always go with the Workgroup edition and Concurrent licensing."
"The cost is something like $15,000, per license. But I haven't looked at those numbers in three years. It was over $100,000 to initially set everything up and get it all configured."
"Yearly, our cost is €100,000."
"The licensing enables you to differentiate between people who edit the content and the people who consume it. We are able to keep the licensing costs down by keeping the "contributor" licenses to a minimum, and we then just roll out the content in a read-only version for the rest of our users."
"I estimate that we pay between $40,000 and $50,000 a year for the solution, not including the upfront costs to buy things the first time."
"I think erwin is quite expensive. I have difficulty selling the portal, in fact."
"If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive."
"MEGA HOPEX's licensing costs are yearly."
"The price of the support depends on the vendors that are reselling this module or the MEGA HOPEX version 5. We are on premium support and are their only partners in the GCC, we have a premium support contract with them. The support we have is not with the client. The client does not bear the cost, it's us who bear the cost."
"The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"The product has a high cost."
"I've been told that MEGA HOPEX is very expensive, which is why small organizations dismiss the tool. It's complex and costly versus other simpler and cheaper solutions."
"The pricing depends on the number of licenses purchased."
"The tool is relatively expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Performing Arts
10%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Any experience with Strategic Project Portfolio Management Solutions?
Hi @Cheryl Joseph ​Looking at the crossover between Project and Portfolio management with EA, then Planview could be a good choice. If looking at Portfolio Management from an EA perspective then Le...
 

Also Known As

erwin EA, erwin Business Process, erwin Enterprise Architecture
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AT&T, Bank of America, Chevron, Duke University, ESPN, Fidelity, GE, JP Morgan Chase, KPMG, McGraw Hill, NASA, Pfizer, Royal Bank of Scotland, Teradata, Union Pacific, Vodafone, Wells Fargo.
Aetna, Fannie Mae, M&T Bank, Glatfelter Insurance Group, Zions Management Services Company, The College Board, Baxter Credit Union, AXA Financial, Missouri Department of Conservation, New York State OTDA, MEG Energy Corp, Walgreens, Procter & Gamble, Biogen Idec, Gilead Sciences, Organic Valley, Trinity Health, Nissan and Ford
Find out what your peers are saying about MEGA HOPEX vs. erwin Evolve and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.