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

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central vs SYSPRO comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Busi...
Ranking in ERP
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
Activity Based Costing Software (2nd)
SYSPRO
Ranking in ERP
31st
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the ERP category, the mindshare of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is 3.0%, down from 6.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SYSPRO is 1.1%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ERP Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central3.0%
SYSPRO1.1%
Other95.9%
ERP
 

Featured Reviews

Jacinta Chanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Examinations Manager at Northrise University
Integrated academic workflows have transformed how our institution manages courses and results
For Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, every time we need to make an adjustment, we must make a payment, which is slightly expensive for us as an organization. There are certain modifications we'd like to make, and those come with a cost. The licensing is also very expensive, so if the prices could be revisited, especially for educational institutions, that would be really helpful. Otherwise, it has proven to be a very good tool for us as an organization. I chose a rating of nine for Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central because it has been very useful for us as an organization, but there are still a few improvements that need to be made. Sometimes we experience glitches when generating certain reports, and every time we need to make a modification, we have to pay for that. Thus, I will not give it a ten because there are a few areas needing improvement.
reviewer1413297 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
A great choice for straight manufacturing, but not suitable for complex manufacturing models
SYSPRO at the moment is lacking on the project side. There's a module called Projects and Contracts, and it's a poorly designed module. One of my clients is a project-based organization, and they're finding it extremely difficult to manage their business using SYSPRO, to the point that they're looking at alternative solutions. The Projects and Contracts module is not a very useful tool. It does project accounting reasonably well, but in terms of putting in proper structures, like a work breakdown structure and so forth, it's actually quite poor. Their design or their architecture for the Projects module isn't good enough. They need to redesign it and redevelop it. They have made improvements. However, the problem is that if you're building on a bad foundation, then your building isn't going to be very strong. That's principally their problem. Any heavy equipment company would have a requirement to keep their equipment available for production. In that sense, SYSPRO has no maintenance management functionality. There's also no functionality for field services management. These two functionalities are critical for places like mines or for heavy equipment manufacturers who service the aftermarket and so forth. From a product perspective, this obviously isn't a good place to be because they are sort of taking themselves out of the market for quite a number of industries. They are constrained to manufacturing and distribution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Microsoft offers a complete end-to-end solution for organizations of all statuses and sizes."
"Ease of use, extremely flexible, and cost effective, it is well targeted for small and medium size businesses."
"The most valuable features of Business Central for me are its seamless integration with Power BI and the ability to create customized reports."
"Dynamics 365 Business Central is mostly used for financial management."
"This is a robust solution, and I like the integration with Power BI wherein we are able to deploy multiple reports along with Power BI and have access to all the reports we need in one dashboard, which is very useful for us and for the sales department in particular."
"This is a flexible ERP solution and it includes these major functional areas: Trade, supply chain, manufacturing, finance, logistics, warehouse, service, and quality management."
"It is a stable solution."
"This is readily available and affordable, as well as user-friendly and simple to use in my opinion."
"The Financial Accounting module, in general, is quite good; it is quite simple but powerful, and similarly, the Manufacturing functionality, including a multiple level bill of materials, is also quite useful."
 

Cons

"It would be nice, in Microsoft Teams, if we were able to type more information into the chat."
"Inter-company functionality: Relatively shallow and mostly manual."
"Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central has been buggy in my experience and they should improve in this area. Additionally, there are too many updates. The updates involve a whole bunch of applications as part of the package, such as the Edge browser. The updates are too broad across the whole package of applications."
"Microsoft Dynamics NAV could improve the reporting."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to reverse or correct transactions more easily."
"The formulas in Power BI could be simpler. Sometimes, it's difficult to figure them out, but I am part of a lot of communities that work with us, so we help each other."
"It could be more stable."
"For Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, every time we need to make an adjustment, we must make a payment, which is slightly expensive for us as an organization."
"SYSPRO at the moment is lacking on the project side. There's a module called Projects and Contracts, and it's a poorly designed module. One of my clients is a project-based organization, and they're finding it extremely difficult to manage their business using SYSPRO, to the point that they're looking at alternative solutions. The Projects and Contracts module is not a very useful tool. It does project accounting reasonably well, but in terms of putting in proper structures, like a work breakdown structure and so forth, it's actually quite poor. Their design or their architecture for the Projects module isn't good enough. They need to redesign it and redevelop it. They have made improvements. However, the problem is that if you're building on a bad foundation, then your building isn't going to be very strong. That's principally their problem. Any heavy equipment company would have a requirement to keep their equipment available for production. In that sense, SYSPRO has no maintenance management functionality. There's also no functionality for field services management. These two functionalities are critical for places like mines or for heavy equipment manufacturers who service the aftermarket and so forth. From a product perspective, this obviously isn't a good place to be because they are sort of taking themselves out of the market for quite a number of industries. They are constrained to manufacturing and distribution."
"SYSPRO at the moment is lacking on the project side. There's a module called Projects and Contracts, and it's a poorly designed module."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing of this solution at three out of five."
"The price of the solution is reasonable."
"There is an annual cost of using Microsoft Dynamics NAV. The cost is approximately 140,000 INR."
"The price of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is reasonable. We pay monthly for the use of the solution."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
"The deployment cost us $70,000 and we pay around $18,000 annually for support, which we find to be expensive."
"Business Central charges a monthly fee of $70 to $100 per user."
"The solution's license is costly compared to other CRM tools."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ERP solutions are best for your needs.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Construction Company
11%
University
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business43
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise19
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Is it advisable to purchase Dynamics CRM in addition to NAV 2016?
Short answer: depends on your sales needs. NAV 2016’s built-in CRM is very basic. It’s fine for simple contact management and basic sales tracking, but it lacks: Proper pipeline management Adva...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Dynamics NAV?
Microsoft Dynamics NAV pricing can vary significantly depending on the number of users, deployment model, customizations, and implementation scope. In my experience, the software license is only pa...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Dynamics NAV?
The only thing that could be improved is integration with WhatsApp, which I can see for Microsoft that it has to be available, and that becomes a challenge sometimes. Everything else is perfect.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Dynamics NAV, MS Dynamics NAV
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Harris Farm Markets, Mister Spex GmbH, Bounce Foods, Eurofin Services SA, Medica Medizintechnik, Associated Gaskets, Onduline, Sitka Surfboard Corporation, World Animal Protection
Arctic Manufacturing
Find out what your peers are saying about SAP, Oracle, Microsoft and others in ERP. Updated: July 2026.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.