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

IBM InfoSphere Optim vs Oracle Essbase comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 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

IBM InfoSphere Optim
Ranking in Database Development and Management
16th
Average Rating
6.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Oracle Essbase
Ranking in Database Development and Management
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Database Development and Management category, the mindshare of IBM InfoSphere Optim is 2.6%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Essbase is 0.9%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Database Development and Management
 

Featured Reviews

Kenneth Estanislao - PeerSpot reviewer
Backups become efficient while cost concerns remain
I am still working with IBM and we are transitioning to other tools rather than using IBM InfoSphere Optim. We use other tools, but I cannot recall the name because I am not the one currently handling it. It has transitioned to other architects. For IBM InfoSphere Optim, we are still currently using it, but we have transitioned to the newer version, the latest one with support for AWS S3. I cannot identify a main competitor for IBM InfoSphere Optim because we have transitioned to other architects, and they are the ones looking for other tools. The last comparison I did was almost 4 years ago. I am not using any AI technology with IBM InfoSphere Optim. I rate IBM InfoSphere Optim a seven out of ten. The tool is good, but the price is not favorable as it is the most expensive part. I can recommend IBM InfoSphere Optim for enterprises.
Pratik Phapale - PeerSpot reviewer
Multidimensional cube structure enables complex data storage and Oracle consistently upgrades Essbase
It's definitely growing and has many great features, especially in the cloud. I haven't used the on-premises server as much. Multidimensional data processing: Essbase is a kind of backbone, or back end, for systems like Hyperion Planning and Hyperion Financial Management. It's a multidimensional cube where we can store and process details, generate reports, and do multiple data processing, which isn't possible in Oracle or other alternatives. So, I'm grateful for this experience. Continuous improvement: Recently, I faced a version upgrade from 11.1.2 to 11.4. Now I'm on 11.2.10. Essbase is continuously upgrading its features in different areas, like configuration, properties, and the cloud platform. It's great to have experience with this, as well as working with the fundamental parts of the VM sets.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We like that we can easily restore the database with just a few clicks. The database is linked as well."
"I feel the solution to be a bit faster than the traditional methods, which makes it easy to customize."
"The compression feature is valuable because it achieves around 80% compression."
"It is highly efficient and easily scalable, particularly for handling large databases."
"Essbase is extremely stable and low-maintenance."
"Oracle Essbase is a web integration system that integrates with other data systems."
"Unlike relational, where you're linking together multiple tables, with Essbase, you basically define what the dimensions are beforehand, and you define the hierarchy, and then load the data. This allows you to do a pretty sophisticated analysis so that you can drill into it and slice and dice the data."
"It's a very powerful analytical engine with Essbase as the back end. We can analyze, transform, or utilize a big chunk of data for our calculations."
"It is very fast compared to other normal databases, like SQL and MySQL."
"The solution can handle a large volume of data."
"It helps us fetch specific data sets per users' requirements."
 

Cons

"While the solution is very supportive of Db2, it is not so friendly when it comes to IMS databases."
"We're looking for a solution that can be implemented on AWS. IBM InfoSphere Optim can be implemented on AWS, but it costs more than double what we're currently paying. So, it's not really of good value for us."
"The potential room for improvement for IBM InfoSphere Optim is usually its cost, as it is too expensive."
"There is room for improvement in terms of cost-effectiveness."
"The initial setup is pretty complex."
"I would like to see an integration with application performance management and a version control management tool."
"The consolidation engine, which is HFM or FCCS, needs some room for improvement."
"It's an expensive product to use."
"They should improve the solution's performance."
"The solution could enhance business analytics. I delved into the data using Oracle Essbase to create a new support tool."
"The reporting tool of Essbase needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM InfoSphere Optim is a very expensive solution. Actually, it's the most expensive archiving solution that we have."
"Essbase is competitively priced."
"The solution is expensive."
"I believe the licensing is on a monthly base."
"It is a costly solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Database Development and Management solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Insurance Company
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
10%
Insurance Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM InfoSphere Optim?
The potential room for improvement for IBM InfoSphere Optim is usually its cost, as it is too expensive. Currently, there are no issues with IBM InfoSphere Optim; the only problem is the cost, whic...
What is your primary use case for IBM InfoSphere Optim?
My current use case for IBM InfoSphere Optim is just for doing backups. We are using IBM InfoSphere Optim specifically for backup purposes.
What advice do you have for others considering IBM InfoSphere Optim?
I am still working with IBM and we are transitioning to other tools rather than using IBM InfoSphere Optim. We use other tools, but I cannot recall the name because I am not the one currently handl...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle Essbase?
It's not that expensive, but also not cheap. I'm not sure because it's a private license.
What needs improvement with Oracle Essbase?
If I got the opportunity to work with Hyperion, which is the best product, I would definitely go with that. The main concern is that Oracle is ending on-premises server support, so it would be bett...
What is your primary use case for Oracle Essbase?
We provide complete ownership of this application to Walmart projects. In the UK system, we support and develop for the Asda account, known as Eltham. We provide installation and support to over 50...
 

Also Known As

IBM Optim, Optim
Essbase
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Durham Police Department, Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc., Continental, KCE Electronics Public Company Limited, The University of Adelaide, Migros Zurich, COPROB
CHU de Rennes, Bellco Credit Union, Akindo Sushiro Co. Ltd, Deutsche Telekom AG, Samarco MineraÊo S.A., PCCW Ltd., QDQ media S.A.U., Boiron Italia, Specialized Bicycle Components Inc., Akindo Sushiro Co. Ltd., Air Canada, Daelim Industrial Co. Ltd.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM InfoSphere Optim vs. Oracle Essbase and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.