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

MEGA HOPEX vs No Magic MagicDraw 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

MEGA HOPEX
Ranking in Business Process Design
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (3rd), GRC (5th)
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
14th
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 February 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 3.7%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.6%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
MEGA HOPEX3.7%
No Magic MagicDraw2.6%
Other93.7%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

AB
Administrator at a healthcare company with 51-200 employees
Supports process modeling and customization but needs better reporting flexibility and UI improvements
As an administrator, I would improve MEGA HOPEX by adding a WYSIWYG feature for building reports, which would be very helpful. Additionally, I would want reporting customization from the front end web application, not only from the Windows app, which is the customizer. If all changes could be made in the web application, that would be beneficial because every time we need to request access to the server, it takes time in large organizations and involves multiple levels of approvals from cybersecurity and IT security, which can block the project. Regarding dashboards in MEGA HOPEX, they could definitely be better. Having something similar to ARIS would make it easier to build dashboards, providing a what-you-see-is-what-you-get experience, allowing me to drag and drop elements, configure them, and test queries. Moreover, RFQL language is not common, so in MEGA HOPEX, I need to learn RFQL querying. In terms of additional features for MEGA HOPEX, I would appreciate more features for workflows. There are limitations in customizing the email notifications sent during workflows. When creating a workflow, I can configure actions and customize the text, but not the header and footer. Therefore, all emails from the tool come with a MEGA HOPEX header. In large organizations like BPM COE, we want to have our own logo, header, and footer in those emails, but this is not configurable, which I find limiting. I would appreciate easier features to customize workflows and create workflows.
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

"MEGA offers a more integrated GRC platform to facilitate enhanced coordination between the functions of Risk, Compliance, and Internal Audit on a single platform solution - HOPEX."
"The ability to customize is valuable."
"What's most valuable in MEGA HOPEX is that it follows the reference model where each component is defined. I also like the diagram consistency in MEGA HOPEX."
"I find the process modeling and value chain features valuable. The application portfolio management functionality and workflow management capabilities are also nice. It provides a holistic view for stakeholders and helps align IT with business strategies. It facilitates collaboration across the organization and covers all domains, including business, applications, technology, and data."
"The most valuable feature is that the software controls everything from a single management window."
"We use the portfolio management feature heavily."
"The strength of MEGA HOPEX lies in its ability to customize the metamodel."
"It is very interactive."
"The most valuable features with No Magic MagicDraw are its ease of use; you can put this in front of a 12-year-old and they would know what to do right away."
"The initial setup was not straightforward."
"I would rate MagicDraw a nine out of ten because of the price. Enterprise Architect has a lot of bugs and MagicDraw is a lot more accurate and flexible. It's a level better."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality."
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to quickly build multiple layers within the organizational and business process environments, as well as in the SysML product environments, and converting to files that can be accessed by clients who do not have a system and a teamwork server access."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
 

Cons

"Lacking more out of the box integrations."
"I would like to see more regular updates released."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"There is still room for improvement in MEGA HOPEX in my field of work. Some aspects are not working efficiently."
"MEGA HOPEX's problem is that it is expensive, but it's a fantastic tool."
"To be honest, it is not the best support that I have seen in my career."
"MEGA HOPEX can improve process simulation in the BPA module. If the solution was better we would not have to use another solution for this purpose. Simulating scenarios in the future for the to-be processes is in demand. If we can have the simulation engine built inside MEGA HOPEX, we would not have to purchase another license or solution to integrate them with each other. This would be a great improvement."
"The initial setup is a little complex."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"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. MagicDraw is stuck at C++03 standards, whereas most C++ programs today want to use the latest definition of the C++ standards. We were at C++11, and we wanted to do code engineering with C++11 or 17, but they didn't support it. That pushed us into a different tool, which is Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"There could be a trial version for students."
"The licenses are expensive compared to similar tools. At the moment, the user is open to using MagicDraw if it's 15% more than other solutions. If it were to cost any more, they wouldn't use it."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"Some of No Magic MagicDraw's most valuable features were its integration with other simulation tools, such as MATLAB, the seasonal plugin, and the Rangel simulation toolkit."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"The price of the support depends on the vendors that are reselling this module or the MEGA HOPEX version 5. We are on premium support and are their only partners in the GCC, we have a premium support contract with them. The support we have is not with the client. The client does not bear the cost, it's us who bear the cost."
"It is very expensive."
"I've been told that MEGA HOPEX is very expensive, which is why small organizations dismiss the tool. It's complex and costly versus other simpler and cheaper solutions."
"The product has a high cost."
"The price of the MEGA HOPEX license could improve, it is expensive. The license key for business process analysis and IT architecture is approximately €10,000. This price is fixed, it's not a subscription or cloud-based version. It is a one-time price."
"The pricing depends on the number of licenses purchased."
"The tool is relatively expensive."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"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."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"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)."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
24%
Government
11%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise24
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

Any experience with Strategic Project Portfolio Management Solutions?
Hi @Cheryl Joseph ​Looking at the crossover between Project and Portfolio management with EA, then Planview could be a good choice. If looking at Portfolio Management from an EA perspective then Le...
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
MagicDraw
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aetna, Fannie Mae, M&T Bank, Glatfelter Insurance Group, Zions Management Services Company, The College Board, Baxter Credit Union, AXA Financial, Missouri Department of Conservation, New York State OTDA, MEG Energy Corp, Walgreens, Procter & Gamble, Biogen Idec, Gilead Sciences, Organic Valley, Trinity Health, Nissan and Ford
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
Find out what your peers are saying about MEGA HOPEX vs. No Magic MagicDraw and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.