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

GeneXus vs Magic xpa Application Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 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

GeneXus
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Low-Code Development Platforms (20th)
Magic xpa Application Platform
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (9th), Application Infrastructure (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of GeneXus is 3.4%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 3.1%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile Development Platforms Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
GeneXus3.4%
Magic xpa Application Platform3.1%
Other93.5%
Mobile Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

XavierEspinoza - PeerSpot reviewer
Internal System Coordinator at Red CEDIA
Offers a simplified architecture with outstanding integration capabilities
The integration capabilities of GeneXus are highly valuable for our organization. The metadata obtained within the logic of different systems is also vital. Due to the solution, our company team doesn't have to work with multiple languages and integrations can be made with C Sharp. JavaScript can also be used with GeneXus, the tool takes charge of all the rest and has a simple architecture. The solution can be used out of the box without facing any issues and nothing much needs to be done with frameworks. In our case we need to use Python with GeneXus, we use Ironpython to embed python code in C# .
Mylsamy T. - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Associate - IT at Himalaya Wellness Company
Enables us to develop more than 90 applications in-house, which are used across our organization
It's a bit difficult to work with purely web-based applications to get the data and display it. There have been a few times when the connection was disconnected between the server and your browser. The connectivity on browser-built applications needs to be improved. The mobile application development could be easier. They could include different external applications, like finger sensors. I'm not sure whether it's in version 3.8 or not.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is fast in creating systems and connects to the database quickly."
"In Knowledge Base, being able to model the workflow before developing the screens is great. We first work with the tables or the transactions using GeneXus and then we work on the screens."
"The front-end features are the most valuable."
"This solution works extremely quickly in terms of enabling an application in a production environment."
"The integration capabilities of GeneXus are highly valuable for our organization"
"The solution provides ease of programming and the speed of delivery of demands."
"With the solution, I can work a normal day. I can plan my work and any other activities for days ahead."
"With GeneXus, we can create logical representations of transactions in the form of objects."
"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"Typically an experienced Magic developer can do the work of two to three experienced C#/.NET developers. Customers are amazed at how quickly most new features can be added and bug fixes implemented. I have worked for four employers - including myself - using Magic, and in most instances, bug fixes are addressed and deployed in under six hours."
"The best feature of Magic is the development time. The time it takes to develop something is incredibly fast if you compare Magic with, for example, Java."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"Magic’s Database Gateway allows the logic of the program to be isolated from the underlying database. This provides the flexibility not only to move existing programs to different database environments without the need to change the logic in the program but also allows the programmer access to different databases without the need to know how to "talk" to them."
"The Magic xpa Application Platform is very suitable for production since it is easy to update. The program is simple to upgrade and deploy. The solution is convenient in production. You need to adjust the data, then adjust the program which is not difficult."
"Without the need to compile code, the time spent in the development cycle is greatly reduced, allowing the programmer to test modifications to a program immediately after they have been saved."
"Being able to make changes to existing programs to comply with last minute changes in requirements, and/or being able to fix, test, review, and deploy new code in a manner of hours instead of days, definitely gives us a huge advantage over our competitors and this is only possible thanks to Magic’s speed of programming."
 

Cons

"It would be helpful to have additional assisted processing with training."
"GeneXus is a wonderful tool for the backend. It's the best in the world, but for the frontend, GeneXus needs to improve. There should be easier steps for managing various aspects, such as alerts and messages to show to the end-users."
"The tool needs to be tuned before being used. You need some experience to get the best out of the tool."
"Documentation is always an issue. In order to develop with GeneXus, there is very little documentation. The documentation is not clear enough in order to develop a great tool."
"The front-end with GeneXus is not as good as the back-end."
"Code generation is highly time-consuming for GeneXus"
"It would be better if GeneXus had a wiki. The developer needs some experience to work with the tools. It would be better if they could improve the community. If we have some problem, I open a ticket that takes us to a board, and I have to describe my issue in detail. If the tools have a general community for us to explore with some videos or some articles, I think that that may help the developer."
"I told them to add something about Angular. They're already working on adding it."
"I would like to see a spell checker included with optional language support. Currently, this has to be purchased from a third-party."
"When you have several tasks, you open a screen in a task in developing mode, and you don't see the parent screens. Debugging lacks the effects to solve problems. You have to do it first in a kind of studio. Then you have to be sure that you can do it in Magic because there is almost nothing to debug it. It's practically impossible to debug. You have to be sure before you put your snippets."
"In the next version of the Magic xpa Application Platform, I want tables or small programs where I can directly add expressions. I can do it on SQL, but it would make life much easier if that specification were added to the platform."
"Support is very bad."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"It is missing basic charting tools for bar/pie/series charts. It is left to the developer to acquire and deploy charting tools or the customer to purchase a third-party reporting tool to produce charts."
"The configuration of the xpa RIA mobile environment is complex and a discouragement to new developers. Also, Magic's documentation can be less than complete at times which leads to frustration for new developers. (I encourage new Magic developers to join the Magic Users Group)."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"People tend to work with GeneXus if it's cheap, but GeneXus does have licensing policies...Moreover, the cost of resourcing work in GeneXus may make it more expensive than other programming languages."
"I know that its licenses are generally per year, and in the past, the license for GeneXus was around $5,000, but I don't know what's the current price of the GeneXus license."
"It's expensive. I'd rate it a four out of ten in terms of pricing."
"The tool's price is good."
"The price is good."
"The solution is very expensive."
"I give the cost of the solution a four out of ten."
"The cost of a GeneXus license is extremely high. At the same time, one person using the solution can do the work of three Java or data developers. I think that's why they charge so much. It's too expensive, which is one reason it isn't widely used."
"The licensing is too costly."
"There are different licenses, we have the application and the online application. There are two different licenses for two different program sites for the Magic xpa Application Platform."
"The cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"The licensing cost varies because nowadays Magic has tailor-made offerings for clients. I think the solution is worth the money."
"My clients have to purchase additional licenses in order to use what I built. It's not a fair approach."
"It's not cheap. The licenses are not cheap. Not at all. They cost much money. There are other tools with free licenses but Magic asks for a lot of money."
"Magic is not the cheapest IDE out there. If you are considering Magic xpa, you should do a cost-benefit analysis to feel comfortable with your decision. The Magic sales staff is very helpful in providing pricing."
"The main problem with the Magic xpa Application Platform is pricing. You have to pay a lot of money for development, and you also have to pay a lot for the deployments and runtime, while in most competitors, you have to pay a lot for one of the two and not both."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with GeneXus?
GeneXus needs to be more consistent in functionality without any errors. Code generation is highly time-consuming for GeneXus, but in some cases, it saves time as well. Some errors will take too lo...
What is your primary use case for GeneXus?
Our company uses the latest version of GeneXus. The solution is used in our company to develop various enterprise systems, and GeneXus is used as an integrator, which further facilitates low-cost d...
What advice do you have for others considering GeneXus?
The tool's use case depends upon the requirements. The solution is ideal for integrations to modernize systems. GeneXus is also used in a site to develop systems with functional programming for big...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
uniPaaS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Canal de Panamá, Gerdau, Coca-Cola, Mercado Libre, DHL, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, TECNISA, Mexican Polak Group, Ferrovalle, Canon, Azteca, KPMG, TURBUS, Santander, BBVA
ADD, Cape plc, Adecco, Kuno Kinzoku Industry Co., GE Capital, Dove Tree, CBS Outdoor, Paris-Nord Villepinte Exhibition Center, Allstate Life Insurance Company, Titan Software Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about GeneXus vs. Magic xpa Application Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.