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

Melissa Data Quality vs ibi Data Quality comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 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

ibi Data Quality
Ranking in Data Quality
10th
Ranking in Data Scrubbing Software
6th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Melissa Data Quality
Ranking in Data Quality
7th
Ranking in Data Scrubbing Software
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Data Quality category, the mindshare of ibi Data Quality is 2.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Melissa Data Quality is 4.6%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Quality Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Melissa Data Quality4.6%
ibi Data Quality2.3%
Other93.1%
Data Quality
 

Featured Reviews

VP
Solutions Architect at GreenZone Solutions Inc
Offers numerous prebuilt data quality plans that can be reused for various data cleansing tasks
We had many duplicates originating from different source systems. We were able to match and deduplicate a significant amount of data. Additionally, we could synchronize and write back the latest information to the systems that were out of sync, ensuring they had the most recent data. As a result, we could write back and update the source systems.
GM
Data Architect at World Vision
SSIS MatchUp Component is Amazing
- Scalability is a limitation as it is single threaded. You can bypass this limitation by partitioning your data (say by alphabetic ranges) into multiple dataflows but even within a single dataflow the tool starts to really bog down if you are doing survivorship on a lot of columns. It's just very old technology written that's starting to show its age since it's been fundamentally the same for many years. To stay relavent they will need to replace it with either ADF or SSIS-IR compliant version. - Licensing could be greatly simplified. As soon as a license expires (which is specific to each server) the product stops functioning without prior notice and requires a new license by contacting the vendor. And updating the license is overly complicated. - The tool needs to provide resizable forms/windows like all other SSIS windows. Vendor claims its an SSIS limitation but that isn't true since pretty much all SSIS components are resizable except theirs! This is just an annoyance but needless impact on productivity when developing new data flows. - The tool needs to provide for incremental matching using the MatchUp for SSIS tool (they provide this for other solutions such as standalone tool and MatchUp web service). We had to code our own incremental logic to work around this. - Tool needs ability to sort mapped columns in the GUI when using advanced survivorship (only allowed when not using column-level survivorship). - It should provide an option for a procedural language (such as C# or VB) for survivor-ship expressions rather than relying on SSIS expression language. - It should provide a more sophisticated ability to concatenate groups of data fields into common blocks of data for advanced survivor-ship prioritization (we do most of this in SQL prior to feeding the data to the tool). - It should provide the ability to only do survivor-ship with no matching (matching is currently required when running data through the tool). - Tool should provide a component similar to BDD to enable the ability to split into multiple thread matches based on data partitions for matching and survivor-ship rather than requiring custom coding a parallel capable solution. We broke down customer data by first letter of last name into ranges of last names so we could run parallel data flows. - Documentation needs to be provided that is specific to MatchUp for SSIS. Most of their wiki pages were written for the web service API MatchUp Object rather than the SSIS component. - They need to update their wiki site documentation as much of it is not kept current. Its also very very basic offering very little in terms of guidelines. For example, the tool is single-threaded so getting great performance requires running multiple parallel data flows or BDD in a data flow which you can figure out on your own but many SSIS practitioners aren't familiar with those techniques. - The tool can hang or crash on rare occasions for unknown reason. Restarting the package resolves the problem. I suspect they have something to do with running on VM (vendor doesn't recommend running on VM) but have no evidence to support it. When it crashes it creates dump file with just vague message saying the executable stopped running.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Works quickly to develop and deploy to production."
"Ibi Data Quality offers numerous prebuilt data quality plans that can be reused for various data cleansing tasks. Additionally, it provides a variety of prebuilt match and merge rules for performing master data management,"
"The customers' addresses are now complete, correct and follow one consistent format."
"​Initial setup was fairly straightforward. The documentation was very good in terms of how to integrate and consume the service(s) that we use. It did not take an abundance of time to set up things on our side to use the service."
"We are able to send out client mailings with the most accurate addresses possible."
"SSIS integration."
"We like having the ability to write our own utilities/software to process our records and store the final output the way we want."
"Extremely easy to install and setup."
"We only use the one feature for the NAICS code. This allows our product users to know what industry a business is in."
"​​Allows us to delete and correct incorrect data to make the searching of our applicant tracking system more consistent and relevant.​​"
 

Cons

"Special integration support could be improved."
"Their data governance portal can be improved. It lacks data governance-related features. Also, PII and anomaly detection could be valuable use cases for ibi. Adding these features would be a great enhancement."
"There are some companies out there using Google or other sources to check / confirm if addresses are residential. If Melissa is not doing this, that could be an improvement."
"Pricing model."
"To continually update the database with NAICS codes on businesses."
"Needs to validate more addresses accurately."
"There are some hitches in setup, especially with the new encoding, but otherwise it’s relatively simple."
"We encounter failed batch processes once in a while, but their team is quick to rectify issues."
"It could always be cheaper."
"Tech support at Melissa Data was very quick to wash their hands of an issue and say it's IT policies on my side that are causing the issue. There was no offer to try and find a work-around. Just an overwhelming attitude of "it’s not our problem.""
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"​We are concerned that our own pricing is going up every year for Melissa Data products, but we highly recommend the services for people who are routinely sending out mailings."
"Pricing is very reasonable."
"​It is affordable."
"The price for address validation is similar in all software. However, the price for geocoding decides the actual pricing. If you get their most accurate geocoding (called GeoPoints), then it will add about $10k+ per million requests."
"Pricing is very reasonable, no licensing required."
"Be sure to determine how the data is priced (record-based versus credit-based or some hybrid of data and services)."
"The only complaint that I have towards it is they sell licenses based on a range of usage, and I feel those ranges are too large."
"Fully understand your volume, both monthly and annually. Speak with a Melissa account manager, they will put together an effective solution to meet your needs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Quality solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Insurance Company
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise14
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iWay Omni-Gen Data Quality?
There is an upgrade to the existing version, where a different license could be used, but we have a perpetual license. I rate the product’s pricing a three out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten i...
What needs improvement with iWay Omni-Gen Data Quality?
Their data governance portal can be improved. It lacks data governance-related features. Also, PII and anomaly detection could be valuable use cases for ibi. Adding these features would be a great ...
What advice do you have for others considering iWay Omni-Gen Data Quality?
For the on-prem solution, we installed a package on the web server. This package included web-based tools and development tools, which were Eclipse-based toolsets. These tools allowed us to design ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

iWay Software Data Quality, iWay Omni-Gen Data Quality Edition, Omni-Gen Data Quality
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ICA Fluor, Estonia Police Department, Kansas City Police Department
Boeing Co., FedEx, Ford Motor Co, Hewlett Packard, Meade-Johnson, Microsoft, Panasonic, Proctor & Gamble, SAAB Cars USA, Sony, Walt Disney, Weight Watchers, and Intel.
Find out what your peers are saying about Melissa Data Quality vs. ibi Data Quality and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.