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

IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog vs SAP Data Hub comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 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

IBM InfoSphere Information ...
Ranking in Metadata Management
9th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SAP Data Hub
Ranking in Metadata Management
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Data Governance (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Metadata Management category, the mindshare of IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog is 3.1%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAP Data Hub is 3.4%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Metadata Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog3.1%
SAP Data Hub3.4%
Other93.5%
Metadata Management
 

Featured Reviews

KM
Member Of Technical Staff at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
A solution that allows for custom assets and data lineages but experiences performance issues when scaling up
The solution has performance issues when scaling up small sets of information such as assets and data lineage to the ITC. It is an Open IGC issue and does not allow a large volume of records to upload in one pass. We have experienced this issue with multiple versions of the solution including 11.3, 11.5 and 11.7 and have escalated the concern to IBM who is trying to resolve it. It would be a benefit to allow more customizations on the UI. Internally, we have identified a number of solutions to the look and feel of the product that we would like to be able to customize.
VM
GTM Lead at Capgemini
The solution is seamless, but the database sometimes leads to confusion
We used to have multiple different kinds of databases, which internally, had different compliance levels. Retention management is very different now. If the policy is live and the claim has been completed, I couldn't archive the claim. I needed to keep a reference integrity of that claim and understand which policy paid out the claim. With this solution, the policy came in six months ago and qualified for archiving. The claim had been paid and in every environment, the claim had been closed, including the reporting system, the claims system, etc. With the payment set gateway, I can just go and archive. But, we had a hard time during this process. I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best feature of IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog for me is that it's easy to use and only requires a little bit of manual intervention. Once you discover the data sources, everything flows into the tool automatically, so you do not have to map it manually. There's been a lot of automation in the solution which I like best."
"The ability to create special rules inside the solution using Portuguese is the most valuable feature."
"What I liked about IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog is that it seemed to have most of the options that you would want from a government catalog. The features of the product are very rich and comprehensive."
"Working on the roles, actually, is the most valuable aspect."
"It is easy to use."
"The graphic flows and the lineage are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The solution allows us to leverage a concept called Open IGC to create custom assets and data lineages that are not technologies typically supported by IBM via connectors."
"The feature I found most valuable in IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog is the lineage as it's very powerful and it provides data analytics in terms of where the data lives and where it goes. The interface is also clear, though it could still be sorted out, but the lineage is the most powerful thing in the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the S/4HANA 1909 On-Premise"
"SAP is one of the most seamless ERPs that have integrated SAP archiving within Excel. I have not seen this with any other database."
"Its connection to on-premise products is the most valuable. We mostly use the on-premise connection, which is seamless. This is what we prefer in this solution over other solutions. We are using it the most for the orchestration where the data is coming from different categories. Its other features are very much similar to what they are giving us in open source. Their push-down approach is the most advantageous, where they push most of the processing on to the same data source. This means that they have a serverless kind of thing, and they don't process the data inside a product such as Data Hub. They process the data from where the data is coming out. If it is coming from HANA, to capture the data or process it for analytics, orchestration, or management, they go to the HANA database and give it out. They don't process it on Data Hub. This push-down approach increases the processing speed a little bit because the data is processed where it is sitting. That's the best part and an advantage. I have used another product where they used to capture the data first and then they used to process it and give it. In Data Hub, it is in reverse. They process it first and give it, and then they put their own manipulations. They lead in terms of business functions. No other solution has business functions already implemented to perform business analysis. They have a lot of prebuilt business functions for machine learning and orchestration, which we can use directly to get an analysis out from the existing data. Most of the data is sitting as enterprise data there. That's a major advantage that they have."
 

Cons

"What I would tell IBM in terms of what needs to change or improve is that the product is too complicated. IBM purchased various components from different vendors over time and certainly in the UK, IBM did not have anybody that had the expertise to be able to get IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog to run properly."
"The simplicity of usage could improve. Perhaps the simplicity of use for end users, not for system integrators, but for the user, the end users."
"An area for improvement in IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog is that it's missing a lot of connectors. Clients complain about not being able to connect some data sources because there's no available connector, so my company raised that issue with IBM. In some cases, third-party connectors are available, but not for all data sources. Another area that needs improvement in the solution is stability because it also has some stability issues. This is the same issue with the other IBM products bundled with IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog. The solution is connected with IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer and IBM InfoSphere DataStage in my company, so if one has issues with stability, the rest of the products are affected as well."
"They need to improve asset management."
"The solution has performance issues when scaling up small sets of information such as assets and data lineage to the ITC."
"What could be improved in IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog is its query tool, including its terms, labels, and reports because the query tool isn't user-friendly. This would also be an additional feature or enhancement in the solution that would make it more attractive to users and would make IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog a really good solution."
"Sometimes, if the product is new, getting support is difficult and the team was facing some challenges."
"The scalability has room for improvement."
"In 2018, connecting it to outside sources, such as IoT products or IoT-enabled big data Hadoop, was a little complex. It was not smooth at the beginning. It was unstable. It took a lot of time for the initial data load. Sometimes, the connection broke, and we had to restart the process, which was a major issue, but they might have improved it now. It is very smooth with SAP HANA on-premise system, SAP Cloud Platform, and SAP Analytics Cloud. It could be because these are their own products, and they know how to integrate them. With Hadoop, they might have used open-source technologies, and that's why it was breaking at that time. They are providing less embedded integration because they want us to use their other products. For example, they don't want to go and remove SAP Analytics Cloud and put everything in Data Hub. They want us to use SAP Analytics Cloud somewhere else and not inside the Data Hub. On the integration part, it lacks real-time analytics, and it is slow. They should embed the SAP Analytics Cloud inside Data Hub or support some kind of analysis. They do provide some analysis, but it is not extensive. They are moreover open source. So, we need a lot of developers or data scientists to go in and implement Python algorithms. It would be better if they can provide their own existing algorithms and give some connections and drop-down menus to go and just configure those. It will make things really quick by increasing the embedded integrations. It will also improve the process efficiency and processing power. Its performance needs improvement. It is a little slow. It is not the best in the market, and there are other products that are much better than this. In terms of technology and performance, it is a little slow as compared to Microsoft and other data orchestration products. I haven't used other products, but I have read about those products, their settings, and the milliseconds that they do. In Azure Purview, they say that they can copy, manage, or transform the data within milliseconds. They say that they can transform 100 gigabytes of data within three to five seconds, which is something SAP cannot do. It generally takes a lot of time to process that much amount of data. However, I have never tested out Azure."
"The company has everything offshore."
"Nowadays there are some inconsistencies in data bases, however, they upgrade and release the versions to market."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing for IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog is per user."
"In terms of pricing, I find IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog excessive. It's at the top end of the price range in terms of what you get for your money. It's an expensive product, and contractually, IBM is difficult to deal with. I can't remember the exact cost of IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog, but it could be in the region of three hundred thousand pounds."
"IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog is expensive."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"The Cloud is very expensive, but SAP HANA previous service is okay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Metadata Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
35%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
7%
Computer Software Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
No data available
 

Also Known As

IBM Information Governance Catalog
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rabobank, QuadReal Property Group, Jakarta Smart City
Kaeser Kompressoren, HARTMANN
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog vs. SAP Data Hub and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.