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
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
GRC (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of erwin Evolve is 3.3%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 5.9%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
MEGA HOPEX5.9%
erwin Evolve3.3%
Other90.8%
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

"I really liked that it mapped out processes and was able to attach the data model to the appropriate process. You could map out the process, then when you got down to a specific couple of data elements, you could attach the table in the database that supported that process. You could connect it with erwin Data Modeler for that."
"I have not seen capabilities for web-sharing and interaction with the architecture from any other supplier. It's a great capability..."
"The most valuable features for us are impact analysis, where I can easily visualize the impact of change."
"The ability to share and collaborate on the solution is its most valuable feature."
"We use erwin Evolve to publish to the website. This allows us to enable publishing our website using parameterisation features. In a very fast, quick way, we can publish a table or chart onto a website."
"Evolve's reverse engineering ability is quite useful."
"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."
"Evolve is like a tank. You can do whatever you want with the solution, but you need to customize it. I think that it's not very aligned with the framework for enterprise architecture. MEGA is focused on these enterprise architectures, but it's only for that. With Evolve, you can do everything you want with professional services."
"Every module sets up the same information in a unique repository."
"Customer support is fantastic. They are very helpful whenever we get on the line with the support team."
"What I find the most valuable is the process workflow. It is really good."
"You do not need to be a professional of enterprise modeling to contribute to the enrichment and improvement of the enterprise repository."
"We use the portfolio management feature heavily."
"HOPEX has a panel that offers various views. I think that is very good. MEGA has an app for integrating with a lot of apps. We help our clients integrate HOPEX with a different product like Apple Gateway, for example. I've been with the company for 15 years, and we connect with everything. Our clientele includes almost all of the banks in Mexico."
"This is a complete package with all of the functionality that we need."
"The most valuable feature is the completeness of HOPEX's meta-model. It's a strong meta-model that's rigid but comprehensive. It's a logical fit for our understanding of how we want things modeled in our database."
 

Cons

"If it had fewer features to model all kinds of architecture, it would be less complicated."
"Business process modelling could be improved."
"They need to develop Evolve's user experience. For example, MEGA has a useful client view that helps with impact analysis. MEGA provides information about the processes, services, infrastructure, and portfolio of applications in one central view. It lets you see the periphery and relationships among components. This view is impressive, and Evolve doesn't have it."
"Add some ability to do conditional Visualization on the models and in reports (some ideas) – maybe as a specialized Theme or Diagram or Display."
"There might be improvement required to better support some of the MPP databases for non-relational data structures and NoSQL databases."
"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."
"The solution needs to focus on allowing for more integrations."
"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."
"Scalability can be a problem sometimes."
"It takes a long time to learn how to use HOPEX. It's hard to work with it because the user interface is bad. For example, if you want to build a complex system diagram, you need a lot of knowledge to do this correctly and make it readable. In MEGA, you need to create a report and it takes a long time to publish it. The publishing is offline. With RDoC, everything is online."
"The data layer might be the weakest point for MEGA HOPEX."
"I cannot recall coming across any missing features."
"MegaHOPEX lacks comprehensive features that a governance tool should have, particularly in data governance."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"The interface must be improved."
"Lacking more out of the box integrations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Yearly, our cost is €100,000."
"On a yearly basis, our licensing costs are 50,000 euro. There are no additional costs because we are on a SaaS model."
"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."
"Unless you are a one person shop – always go with the Workgroup edition and Concurrent licensing."
"I think erwin is quite expensive. I have difficulty selling the portal, in fact."
"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."
"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."
"The price of the MEGA HOPEX license could improve, it is expensive. The license key for business process analysis and IT architecture is approximately €10,000. This price is fixed, it's not a subscription or cloud-based version. It is a one-time price."
"The product has a high cost."
"If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive."
"The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"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 tool is relatively expensive."
"The pricing depends on the number of licenses purchased."
"MEGA HOPEX's licensing costs are yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Performing Arts
10%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing 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: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.