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

IFS Cloud Platform vs Serviceaide ChangeGear 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

IFS Cloud Platform
Ranking in Help Desk Software
12th
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
CRM (21st), Customer Experience Management (7th), Field Service Management (2nd), ERP (12th), Activity Based Costing Software (7th), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) (2nd), Local Government CRM (9th), IT Asset Management (10th), License Management (2nd)
Serviceaide ChangeGear
Ranking in Help Desk Software
33rd
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
34th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the IT Service Management (ITSM) category, the mindshare of IFS Cloud Platform is 1.6%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Serviceaide ChangeGear is 0.4%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Service Management (ITSM)
 

Featured Reviews

Brendan Fisher - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, customizable, and modern
IFS is a very large and complex software, and implementation of IFS can be challenging and may lead to a difficult lengthy project. It can take between 12 and 24 months in some cases to deploy. I have found that not all clients are fully aware of how big the task is that they're undertaking when they make a decision to move to software like this. Companies need to be more aware of the complexity of an ERP implementation project and while I fully recommend moving to IFS, it is not easy and does require business change when adopting an ERP solution. New features are a difficult ask - I work across multiple industries and everyone would probably choose a different feature. Maybe BIM in Construction or Customs link-ups for importers/exporters.
UA
A fairly stable solution that’s highly mature, but has a poor user interface
The solution does not align as modern service solutions do. Seamless integration is no available among the processes. Their service management application needs a lot of work. It’s in a really bad state right now. They brought on a new interface that clumped all the processes and features of the solution into one. Still, it’s not really compatible with other solutions. Because of this, its rating has dropped in Gardner. The solution needs to improve its reporting features. The user interface needs a lot of improvements. The product needs to implement a cloud platform solution, which is lacking so far. Their workflow engine is still segregated. It’s not embedded. If you need to do some workflow approvals, you cannot do them directly on the service desk. You have to go into Outlook and do an approval or you have to go in through another screen to handle the approval because the workflow engine they have is a separate product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"A high level of ERP can be handled in IFS."
"IFS has been completely rebuilt, modernized, and cloud-based so we don't need bulky software installations."
"There are fewer fields on the user screen compared to other products. This makes the UI a little bit easier to understand."
"The main reason for the ERP project was to bring together our fourteen sites, which had until then worked in separate silos."
"The workflow of the solution is very good."
"One of our favorite features is the "Info-Zone", which provides operational intelligence in flight and in context to guide both business users and support teams to productivity."
"All the modules are valuable in their own right, but everything has to go through the ERP. IFS has done an excellent job integrating the various modules to complete these processes. My expertise is in the finance module, but I have used the other verticals. It's an all-around good product."
"The platform is reliable and stable."
"The solution is a highly mature product. Because of this, it can stand up to any other product on the market."
 

Cons

"Aspects of HR and payroll could be better."
"The user interface can be improved. When you're clicking through the screens, there are some icons or symbols that really need updating and would be more useful and noticeable if they are aesthetically pleasing."
"The solution needs to improve its documentation and user-friendliness."
"I have seen that one of the areas that my company has identified for improvement might be the rental management capabilities within the solution."
"The solution's reporting tools still require improvement."
"There are certain digital features that need to be incorporated, such as IOP."
"Technical support could be improved."
"IFS Applications is not robust enough to handle high-volume transactions, so it's not suitable for larger enterprises."
"The solution needs to improve its reporting features. The user interface needs a lot of improvements."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay for a license to use the solution, which is not very expensive."
"There's an additional yearly cost for support."
"IFS Applications is expensive software, but it's on par with SAP and Oracle. It's for large enterprises and government entities and not for small and medium-sized enterprises. They have one licensing model, but if you want to have a module-specific license, they provide component-based licenses. Unlike SAP and Oracle, it doesn't have different levels of licensing. It's one level of licensing."
"The pricing of the solution may appear to be expensive for smaller companies with only tens of users; however, for larger and mid-size industrial companies, IFS is able to win deals and the pricing is competitive in the market."
"Compared to SAP, the pricing for IFS Applications was very affordable. People using the solution would find that it's worth the money."
"Pricing is an area that could be improved. They could be more competitive."
"It is better to buy implementation services from IFS than from partners"
"Ask for all-inclusive pricing, as they are pretty flexible if you ask for custom models."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IFS Applications?
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten since it is an extremely scalable solution that can be used for various use cases with thousands of users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IFS Applications?
The product is reasonably priced. The costs are justified by the value provided, considering the comprehensive features and minimal need for customization. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with IFS Applications?
I am not able to recall much about batch. Documentation-wise, they need more. There is not much available online, and the documentation availability is on the lower side compared to other products,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

IFS Applications, Assyst, IFS Cloud
Serviceaide ISM (Intelligent Service Management), Nimsoft Service Desk, CA Cloud Service Management , ChangeGear
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

China Airlines, Electrolux Group, Babcock, Cimcorp, Sky, Multiplex, Veolia. 
Oakwood Systems Group
Find out what your peers are saying about IFS Cloud Platform vs. Serviceaide ChangeGear and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.