We performed a comparison between LiquidPlanner and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its dashboards and reports are the most valuable. We are able to share these reports and other information with our leadership."
"The performance is good."
"The most important feature of ServiceNow IT Business Management is flexibility."
"The solution is scalable."
"Stable and scalable solution."
"The technical support is pretty good. ServiceNow has consistently provided excellent assistance."
"Competitive in terms of research"
"The product is quite convenient and user-friendly."
"We like the status report feature. It is something really valuable."
"It is a little rigorous in its methodology and is cumbersome. For example, I have a hard stop date and I would like a project to end by a specific date, but this is not how this solution works. It sorts of spits out the project date based on your resource availability, dependencies, and so on. This sort of project planning works in theory, but that's not always the case. It also relies heavily on resources entering their time into the system, that is, how much time they worked on each of the tasks so that it can sort of consistently update the project. I know that in a lot of organizations, including ours, it is almost impossible to get them to track the time. In terms of additional features, they can include more integration with Microsoft because integration is going to be a key functionality."
"I would like to see some artificial intelligence incorporated into the management functions."
"When we import a really big project with a lot of tasks on it, we face some issues with dependencies. The links between tasks are not working very well. There is definitely room for improvement there. Microsoft Project, in my opinion, is the best option for such a use case."
"The price is too high."
"The timing reporting module, and how it's used is a bit difficult to understand. Everything related to project management is quite extensive. It needs to be simplified. At first, our users didn't want to use it, because it seems a bit complex."
"The solution needs a few things in terms of resource management."
"Dashboard interface is limited functionally and not very user friendly"
"The price keeps going up, and to remain competitive, it needs to have a competitive edge. I would like to see more of the latest innovations, in terms of AI, ML, and all of the latest cutting-edge technologies, included in the platform."
"ServiceNow needs to invest more in integration. That's the only thing. It could always extend its portfolio a little bit."
More ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
LiquidPlanner is ranked 36th in Project Management Software while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is ranked 3rd in Project Portfolio Management with 27 reviews. LiquidPlanner is rated 8.4, while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of LiquidPlanner writes "Good for reporting, but a little rigorous in its methodology and not conducive to real project management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management writes "A very strategic demand management tool that visualizes risks and ratings in a bubble chart". LiquidPlanner is most compared with , whereas ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Jira Align, Microsoft Project Server and Smartsheet. See our LiquidPlanner vs. ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.