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

Magic xpa Application Platform vs Mendix comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 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

Magic xpa Application Platform
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (9th), Application Infrastructure (14th)
Mendix
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (6th), Low-Code Development Platforms (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 4.1%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mendix is 20.7%, down from 22.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Mylsamy T. - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables us to develop more than 90 applications in-house, which are used across our organization
It's a bit difficult to work with purely web-based applications to get the data and display it. There have been a few times when the connection was disconnected between the server and your browser. The connectivity on browser-built applications needs to be improved. The mobile application development could be easier. They could include different external applications, like finger sensors. I'm not sure whether it's in version 3.8 or not.
Richard Van Den Akker - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud-based, helps fill gaps and that seamlessly integrates with existing systems
Mendix provides the ability to create solutions that fill gaps that I would otherwise be unable to address with standard software. It integrates seamlessly with my existing ERP systems, enabling me to build attractive and user-specific solutions. Its cloud-based platform supports agile methods and enhances my development speed. These features enable me to better meet my organizational needs.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Magic is rapid, it's a tool which we use to develop, change and maintain our programs. xpa has a lot more features onboard and it gives us the opportunity to do such things so that we can easily adapt and maintain our programs. It gives certain benefits to stay with our customers and the market."
"Magic’s Database Gateway allows the logic of the program to be isolated from the underlying database. This provides the flexibility not only to move existing programs to different database environments without the need to change the logic in the program but also allows the programmer access to different databases without the need to know how to "talk" to them."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"Typically an experienced Magic developer can do the work of two to three experienced C#/.NET developers. Customers are amazed at how quickly most new features can be added and bug fixes implemented. I have worked for four employers - including myself - using Magic, and in most instances, bug fixes are addressed and deployed in under six hours."
"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"Without the need to compile code, the time spent in the development cycle is greatly reduced, allowing the programmer to test modifications to a program immediately after they have been saved."
"Magic’s unique approach to development ensures that the programmer stays focused on the objective of the program (i.e. display all customers in California), instead of the repetitive tasks that surround it (i.e. connect to database, open customers table, create the query to retrieve records within the specified criteria, fetch the result of the query, connect it to a data grid, etc.)."
"Being able to make changes to existing programs to comply with last minute changes in requirements, and/or being able to fix, test, review, and deploy new code in a manner of hours instead of days, definitely gives us a huge advantage over our competitors and this is only possible thanks to Magic’s speed of programming."
"I highly regard Mendix because of its proper support, troubleshooting options, extensive learning path, and the availability of different types of exams."
"The most valuable features are the integration and UI customization."
"You can scale the solution."
"The initial setup is easy."
"We also use Mendix Enterprise Integration for complex business logic. It's a low-code platform, so we run Mendix in the Mendix Cloud."
"It is a development platform which assists in accelerating your developmental lifecycle. This is one of its most valuable features. This solution also offers a good set of components that are readily available."
"The pricing is very clear, with no hidden fees."
"They are leading in the smart manufacturing, and connectivity space."
 

Cons

"Magic has a tradition, when it adds new technologies/features to the Magic development tool, to provide either no documentation or documentation that does not provide an organized approach for bringing this new technology/feature to experienced Magic programmers."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"I would like to see a spell checker included with optional language support. Currently, this has to be purchased from a third-party."
"When you have several tasks, you open a screen in a task in developing mode, and you don't see the parent screens. Debugging lacks the effects to solve problems. You have to do it first in a kind of studio. Then you have to be sure that you can do it in Magic because there is almost nothing to debug it. It's practically impossible to debug. You have to be sure before you put your snippets."
"The Android environment is missing a number of functions for file/folder manipulation, sending receiving text messages (SMS) and the menuing options are limited. For now, it is left to the developer to write his/her own Java functions to include in the APK."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"In the next version of the Magic xpa Application Platform, I want tables or small programs where I can directly add expressions. I can do it on SQL, but it would make life much easier if that specification were added to the platform."
"Support is very bad."
"There should be more integration with engineering applications and tighter integration for user authentication, such as single sign-on, etc. They have some of that. It just could be stronger."
"Overall, integration with the enterprise ecosystem needs improvement."
"A constraint of Mendix is that you have to look for the required plugins which takes up development time. There are a limited number of Mendix experts in the market."
"I struggle with solutions like Mendix in terms of creating enterprise solutions."
"In the beginning, it is difficult to learn and work with."
"I would also like to see automatic adjustment to the Java Heap, whenever an application load becomes too much for the application. It could also use hot database replication."
"There's no direct tech support."
"There is always a layer of custom code required."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's not cheap. The licenses are not cheap. Not at all. They cost much money. There are other tools with free licenses but Magic asks for a lot of money."
"The licensing cost varies because nowadays Magic has tailor-made offerings for clients. I think the solution is worth the money."
"Magic is not the cheapest IDE out there. If you are considering Magic xpa, you should do a cost-benefit analysis to feel comfortable with your decision. The Magic sales staff is very helpful in providing pricing."
"The cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"There are different licenses, we have the application and the online application. There are two different licenses for two different program sites for the Magic xpa Application Platform."
"The main problem with the Magic xpa Application Platform is pricing. You have to pay a lot of money for development, and you also have to pay a lot for the deployments and runtime, while in most competitors, you have to pay a lot for one of the two and not both."
"My clients have to purchase additional licenses in order to use what I built. It's not a fair approach."
"The licensing is too costly."
"Initially, we started with a year for approximately $25,000, and if we need to expand the number of seats then we will increase it."
"Mendix is not open source, but its license cost is cheap, particularly when compared to the Appian license. The license model would depend on how many users you have and how many applications you are creating. If you are creating a single app, you just need to have a single app license, so it's free. If you want a multiple app license to cover two thousand or three thousand users, for example, internal users or external users, then you need to pay for the license. There's also a license model for above three thousand or four thousand, or five thousand internal and external users."
"I would not recommend the solution to small and medium-sized businesses because it’s expensive. It’s great for big organizations. I rate the pricing as a three out of ten."
"Its cost is higher than competitors. The cost mostly includes licensing. It is charged per user. The cost model could be better. When you have a big company, what does per user mean? If I have a company where I have 40,000 people who will go to access it but only 200 do, how do you license it and who do you pay for? If they hit it once, do you pay for it? The licensing is complex for a big company. It is easy for us to buy all we can eat, get an enterprise license agreement, and call it good."
"Mendix licensing cost is based on the number of apps you have on the server. At the basic level, it is free of charge, so that seems reasonable, but once you go beyond that, and when it comes to the number of users on the app, that basic structure doesn't work, and the pricing tends to get a little bit steep."
"Licensing costs are similar to those for all other IT technology, but they vary by region."
"Pricing used to be complex, but Mendix has improved that quite a bit."
"The solution is a bit expensive compared to others"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Mendix?
We also use Mendix Enterprise Integration for complex business logic. It's a low-code platform, so we run Mendix in the Mendix Cloud.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Mendix?
I have some idea about the licensing part, and it depends on the person and the number of applications.
What needs improvement with Mendix?
Currently, I do not see any improvements needed in Mendix. However, I have not used Mendix for the last few months, so I lack insight into any new features that might have been added.
 

Also Known As

uniPaaS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ADD, Cape plc, Adecco, Kuno Kinzoku Industry Co., GE Capital, Dove Tree, CBS Outdoor, Paris-Nord Villepinte Exhibition Center, Allstate Life Insurance Company, Titan Software Systems
Genzyme, TNT, Yahoo, Capgemini, Roche, D&B, Aegon, kpn, AZL, Sky, Arch, Penn State Univeristy, BancABC
Find out what your peers are saying about Magic xpa Application Platform vs. Mendix and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.