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

IDERA ER/Studio vs OpenText ProVision comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024

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

IDERA ER/Studio
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Database Development and Management (8th)
OpenText ProVision
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
27th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (48th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of IDERA ER/Studio is 4.2%, up from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText ProVision is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management
 

Featured Reviews

Aaron Cutshall - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for data modeling and has a scripting language to write your own scripts
The solution has streamlined our data modeling processes quite a bit. It's a central focus in our data modeling and data cataloging efforts. The tool's reverse engineering capability to bring in existing database structures and create models from them has benefitted our data architecture needs. With the tool's data dictionary capability, we're able to maintain consistency in our models, name use, and actual data domains. The solution's reverse engineering helps with understanding legacy databases. In fact, I've been asked to reverse-engineer several more legacy databases so that we can have them modeled and cataloged. The solution is deployed on the cloud server, but it’s only within our network. The solution has a lot of capabilities. I like the fact that it has a scripting language that allows you to automate and write your own scripts. I think that's been a big bonus for us. I highly recommend the solution because of its capability for logical models, where you can put your business definitions and logic. While less expensive, some other tools can't do that. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
reviewer1944672 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration
I primarily use OpenText ProVision to create our end-to-end process repository and library for different parts of the organization, capturing the collaboration process to get the right inputs OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are able to document the data lineage and data flows of our data from one system to another."
"When validating the model, the ability to provide sub-models to developers, and generate a physical model from the logical, makes it easier to review a logical model with stakeholders."
"I like the fact that it has a scripting language that allows you to automate and write your own scripts."
"The tool is simple to use."
"I set up this tool and found it to be very simple."
"The reverse engineering is the most important feature."
"Straightforward setup."
"Data lineage tracking: It allows us to identify upstream and downstream systems using data."
"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
 

Cons

"The solution could be sped up, as it is a little slow (e.g., when it's doing its database compare)."
"Tech support is a sticking point with me. I am really disappointed in the tech support. We pay for the Platinum level. It takes hours to get a response."
"The screens are a bit outdated. They could use a new look and feel."
"We did have a big issue when we upgraded to the 2016 version. The Team Server portion never did quite install correctly, and/or the database was corrupted, and we never figured it out."
"What I would like to see improved is the reliability of the releases, releases that are a little less buggy."
"when there are some links to the external databases, if this database is not structured it is not uploaded. It gives me errors and I cannot see the view that was created on this structure and I cannot change those views, even manually. It skips the views. I have to ignore those views. I cannot re-upload them because it gives me an error."
"I'd like the ability to debug the errors ourselves instead of having to call them. There are certain types of errors that, I wouldn't say they come up regularly, but when you have an error it is very often the same type of error. Knowing that it's a Type III or Type I, it would be nice to have some kind of debugging facility for us to use to find out where the problem that threw that error occurs. That would be a really cool feature."
"When building the relationships there should be a little more flexibility."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The setup cost may have been around $1500 to $2000."
"At my previous company using ER/Studio, a database compare took four hours before using the product and 15 minutes after using the product."
"I feel the product's pricing is a good value."
"As an individual user, the renewal is a little costly."
"The product is pricey."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is bad and ten is good, I would rate the licensing cost as a seven or eight. It's not too expensive for us."
"Pricing is on point, but do your due diligence - not every developer needs the tool."
"I am currently using the trial version, but this solution is definitely worth considering for the price point."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Energy/Utilities Company
14%
Construction Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IDERA ER Studio?
In terms of pricing, ER/Studio is slightly more expensive compared to Erwin, by about five to ten percent.
What is your primary use case for IDERA ER Studio?
I have been working with data modeling tools. Personally, I have been working with Erwin for many years now. ER/Studio is something I am currently trying to evaluate for acquiring it for our organi...
What advice do you have for others considering IDERA ER Studio?
I would strongly recommend ER/Studio for large teams. Erwin is a very stable product, but for smaller teams, it's okay. If I had to rate ER/Studio, I would give it nine out of ten because the absen...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

IDERA ER Studio, ER/Studio, ER/Studio Enterprise Team Edition
Metastorm ProVision
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Newmont Mining, Entrust, Accolade, TalkTalk, Catalina, Protective Life, NTT Data, dir systèmes, Microsoft; American Express, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Coriant, Fedex, GlaxoSmithKline, PepsiCo, Prudential, Wells Fargo
Delta Technology, Export Development Canada, Rompetrol, Salt River Project, AMEC, U.S. Air Force, HP Consulting & Integration
Find out what your peers are saying about IDERA ER/Studio vs. OpenText ProVision and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.