No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

No Magic MagicDraw vs iServer 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

iServer
Ranking in Business Process Design
13th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (9th)
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of iServer is 3.6%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.4%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
iServer3.6%
No Magic MagicDraw2.4%
Other94.0%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

Antonios Lazanakis - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior IT Solution Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Flexible, easy to use, and easy to import data
We use iServer to establish an enterprise architecture function in our organization iServer is a very flexible platform for defining your own enterprise architecture model. It is very easy to import data, and we also have good integration with Visual Drawing Tools and SharePoint. The solution is…
reviewer2080611 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Ease of use and real-time collaboration empower effective teamwork and streamlined development
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works only with its IBM counterparts. SPARX Enterprise Architecture is very easy to use, but it's limited. It gives you an idea of how your model is developing, so this feature helps maintain integrity or correctness of system models. It's really a good feature to have. You've got to have the simulation toolkit installed to be able to do that, and that works really well. The MagicDraw or CAMEO system is good on its own, but it should be integrated and should come out of the box with the simulation toolkit because there are some things you can't do without it, making it very difficult to have to look for another license to be able to do that. I would prefer that it come with the simulation toolkit.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is easily modified to suit your needs."
"We like the governance."
"I love how there are no milestone swimlanes."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Central repository holding single version of truth."
"There were lots of different requirements, and collaboration and review is one of the biggest things. There is also Office 360 integration, and there's flexibility to use it as a database as well."
"The solution has wide use within Microsoft products. The integration with Microsoft products, and, in particular, Microsoft Office, is great."
"iServer is a very flexible platform for defining your own enterprise architecture model."
"The most valuable feature of No Magic MagicDraw is the simulation capabilities and interface."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
"The initial setup was not straightforward."
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
"We use it to build the physical and logical domains to hold requirements, specifications, use cases, and all the way down to class definitions."
"The technical support is very good."
"No Magic MagicDraw provides a lot of good features on functionality."
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
 

Cons

"It's a very simple tool, which makes me concerned with the performance."
"There can be some performance issues using the solution that should be improved. When you make modifications modify to files there are embedded data within that can take a while to process."
"The performance is slow, which is something that should be improved."
"There are other solutions out there that have a better user interface."
"Cannot see which activities are control activities."
"The migration tool needs to be included in the main package, and not as a separate license."
"It runs relatively slowly."
"Enhancing integration options with ERP or ITSM-related solutions for triggering automated requests for process definitions, changes, and tracking them in the iServer."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy live business process models and capture real-time data (without the need for another product tool) so you don't have to be dependent on other products for this functionality."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"It's very focused on specific modern languages and it doesn't do necessarily general systems software engineering with diagrams. They should expand the diagram types for the languages."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect."
"There's lots of documentation. They process multiples of guides. They've got all kinds of guides and documentation out there, but it's kind of hard to find. There are a lot of videos. You can go to YouTube and find videos on how it's been used in different ways, but it just kind of scratches the surface."
"For the next releases, I would like to have them import requirements from other sources. They could make it very easy to do that because there are a lot requirements management tools like DOORS, D-O-O-R-S, Dynamic Object Oriented Management. A lot of folks use DOORS to create a requirement. For those requirements you allocate them to a component in the architecture and a verification method for that requirement. It would be good if we could import those into MagicDraw as components so you don't have to manually do these things."
"The technical support is not very good."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Aim for the exact number of people who shall define/review approve and view the processes, as it will impact the cost."
"The solution is cheaper than its competitors."
"The product has a moderate pricing."
"It's about 13K to set up and 9K for the license for three months. I think it's about 20K a year, but we haven't firmed up on pricing yet because the price depends on how long we commit to the solution."
"They offer annual subscriptions for developing countries, which are not affordable for small or medium businesses."
"The price of iServer is reasonable compared to other solutions."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
"I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Government
9%
Construction Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
23%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
11%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iServer?
iServer should invest in enhancing the capabilities of the embedded drawing tool, draw.io. draw.io is a drawing tool used to draw architectural diagrams, flow diagrams, etc. It is an alternative to...
What is your primary use case for iServer?
We use iServer to establish an enterprise architecture function in our organization.
What advice do you have for others considering iServer?
I would recommend the solution to other users. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for No Magic MagicDraw?
Maybe the price is a little bit high for a small company to acquire this tool. However, they offer trial versions and trial licenses for members of INCOSE.
What needs improvement with No Magic MagicDraw?
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works...
What is your primary use case for No Magic MagicDraw?
I deal with DOD lifecycle acquisition sorts of things as some of the main use cases currently, and I expect to continue using it for more than 25 years.
 

Also Known As

No data available
MagicDraw
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Barclays, Cathay Pacific, Deloitte, British Gas, MasterCard
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
Find out what your peers are saying about No Magic MagicDraw vs. iServer and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.