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
7.2
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (4th), GRC (3rd)
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 3.0%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 3.1%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

Navi Thejesh - PeerSpot reviewer
Interactive with good functionality and helps with productivity
The latest version is HOPEX WiFi. HOPEX can be on the cloud and accessed from anywhere within the given access network area. It is very interactive. We can do things from anywhere, and all the applications will work as specified. We can generate documents and can publish the documents. We can create a data match and visualize graphs and everything. Everything can be generated from the web interface itself. It has good functionality. We can develop our own customizations and meta models to define requirements, in-house business functions, and requirements. MEGA is already defined by global standards. A company can adapt to global standards and work in such a way to design its own methodology to define its structure. The interface is very good.
DiegoRangel - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced team communication and design exploration with integrated simulation tools
I was using No Magic MagicDraw to model operations, such as using different kinds of operations with ships or crafts and other systems No Magic MagicDraw facilitated great communication within the team and allowed for the exploration of different designs and architectures, which was beneficial…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"You do not need to be a professional of enterprise modeling to contribute to the enrichment and improvement of the enterprise repository."
"The most valuable features of MEGA HOPEX are the seamless VPA module and the good user experience. There are built-in connections that provide integration with other platforms, such as ServiceNow. There is a lot of customization available allowing a lot of freedom. The solution is updated frequently adding new features. For example, the feature GraphQL can be integrated into other solutions, such as ManageEngine for ITSM solutions. You are able to use GraphQL to connect APIs and query the APIs."
"The platform is stable."
"This is a complete package with all of the functionality that we need."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the reuse of common enterprise components and entities."
"MEGA HOPEX helps me to see the benefits of different solutions in terms of the entire ecosystem I have, by providing different integrations and overseeing the entire system."
"The strength of MEGA HOPEX lies in its ability to customize the metamodel."
"It is very interactive."
"It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile."
"The beauty of MagicDraw is that it has a simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it. The simulation allows you to bring in code off of an external code that you can write to set up the simulation and execute the code."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality."
"I like the traceability feature. Whoever is working with the product would be sure of the things that could be affected if they decided to affect one of the other companies. For example, let's say that an engineer starts a new project optimization problem by adjusting the thickness of metal sheets. However, the engineers only see a reduced number of affections, but when we use the requirement traceability, they can see the whole picture. That's the main aspect that we were promoting with this tool."
"The technical support is very good."
"The initial setup was not straightforward."
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
 

Cons

"Scalability can be a problem sometimes."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"The initial setup is a little complex."
"The features are limited. I'm hoping in the future the solution will be bigger and include more items. Right now, overall, it needs more."
"We have a very close relationship with MEGA representatives in Mexico, and we ask them why they don't offer impact analysis. For example, we have a server in the center and provide the client a view of what's in the peripheral area, like one cluster, application, process area, and services. We want to offer our clients that level of visibility with HOPEX."
"The data layer might be the weakest point for MEGA HOPEX."
"MegaHOPEX lacks comprehensive features that a governance tool should have, particularly in data governance."
"The tool needs to have a viewer portal. Currently, we have to use a custom solution to display information, which requires additional effort and tracking of data on a daily basis. Having a built-in viewer dashboard portal would be beneficial."
"There could be a trial version for students."
"There are some technical features that you have to study and do research on to be able to understand."
"The technical support is not very good."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"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."
"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."
"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 UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."
"If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive."
"The pricing depends on the number of licenses purchased."
"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 is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
"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)."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
33%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Government
15%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 do you like most about No Magic MagicDraw?
There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality.
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?
I don't think there are areas that need improvement.
 

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: April 2025.
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.