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

No Magic MagicDraw vs SAP Signavio Process Manager 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

No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SAP Signavio Process Manager
Ranking in Business Process Design
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.4%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAP Signavio Process Manager is 6.3%, down from 9.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SAP Signavio Process Manager6.3%
No Magic MagicDraw2.4%
Other91.3%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Sravani Bodanapu - PeerSpot reviewer
Intelligent Ops Journey Expert at ANZ Banking Group
Process modeling has standardized complex banking workflows and drives data‑driven automation decisions
I would assess the impact of process modeling features on operational transparency as a four. I give it a four because of how well the platform could be utilized if one has a license or would be able to access it via collaborative features, and as well be able to communicate, making it less people dependent and more process dependent. A small gap of one is only because if the map has to be shared or if somebody has to work together on a map, similar to how we have Google Forms where more than two people can make changes simultaneously, the map does not allow that. One has to close it, and the next partner can only access the map after I close it. The existing changes are lost if they click on ignore or if they close the diagram. This is one feature which is sometimes bothersome. The gap of one is something that is personal feedback from my end. If someone is a newbie and they are building a map for the first time, they definitely go through a training module. But if somebody is jumping right in to build a map for the first time, which I did more than a couple of years ago, I felt that given the extent to which we have artificial intelligence capabilities right now, it would be nice if whenever you are saving a diagram and if I build it incorrectly in terms of adhering to BPMN 2.0, errors are shown, which is really nice. There are errors and warnings that need to be corrected to adhere to the standards. It is great that it allows me to save, but in order to correct the errors, if I do not understand what the error is trying to tell me. For example, sometimes it says that the element is named wrong. I understand that; it is a verb and noun that is a requirement. But sometimes it says the edge folding is not clear, and despite trying several times, I still do not get it. SAP could consider having AI capabilities to suggest how it can be done immediately on the screen itself, perhaps in the form of a virtual assistant or something. Today, for larger errors, I go to Google to check it and try to understand. If an assistant tells me that I think the arrow may be placed wrong, I think that would help me. It would save time and help me from looking up multiple dictionaries to understand what it is trying to say. At the moment, we are not integrating SAP Signavio Process Manager with existing ERP systems because internally I think we are using multiple enterprise resource planning tools. Because of that, there is a restraint to connect it with SAP Signavio Process Manager, and there is a lot of concern in terms of how data could be used because we work in a banking environment. We are not leveraging, and we have SAP S/4HANA. It would be great if there is a data lake that connects to the process, but at the moment, we do not do that. Every time we build a process, it is picked up by a different team, and they try to connect it with the data lake. It is a great feature which I think can be leveraged, but with the range of legacy systems that the company is using today, there is not much I can comment about how the ERP can be leveraged internally.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality."
"No Magic MagicDraw provides a lot of good features on functionality."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
"We are getting away from the old ways of writing a lot of papers and requirements documents, architecture documents, technical solution documents, interface documents - those days are gone."
"The technical support is very good."
"The initial setup was not straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of No Magic MagicDraw is the simulation capabilities and interface."
"No Magic has the tools and capabilities to model a complete enterprise and all product lines."
"The most valuable feature is the glossary. It is really nice because all of the information is centralized, and that is a big help to the company."
"The collaboration hub is good because it allows us to share the models that we've captured and to get comments back, and we don't all have to be in the same room, it can be remote and over time."
"The ability to leave comments in the Collaboration Hub is a good and easy way for the employees to give feedback on the processes."
"There are many valuable features, of course. I would say the main value of Signavio is to have your current process map in a way that is easy to read and derive optimization actions to make it leaner, faster, more user friendly, etc. Another great feature is the visualization, which is easy to see and read. How they map the process is also very user friendly, with drag-and-drop functionality. Also, it's a very self-explanatory, user-friendly solution."
"When comparing my experience with Celonis and Signavio, I can discern the distinctions between these two platforms. However, I'm unable to differentiate between ARAs and add-ons, as that falls outside my scope of familiarity. Regarding Celonis, it comes with its set of advantages and disadvantages. Notably, it boasts robust features like action flows, task mining, and seamless integration with AML programming. Conversely, Signavio lacks action flows and instead relies on action segments and tasks for interaction. This discrepancy is a significant factor setting Selenium and SecureView apart. In the context of Signavio, it offers a combination of BPMN and process discovery, a feature absent in Celonis. This tandem of BPMN and process insight contributes to Signavio’S potency. Meanwhile, Celonis primarily features the process miner tool, setting it apart from Signavio. These variations collectively outline the numerous differences existing between Celonis and Signavio."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"In the case of supplier onboarding, we reduced the time from around six days of onboarding a supplier to a 24-hour service level."
"I would say that this solution gives everyone in our organization everything that they need to effectively manage their processes."
 

Cons

"The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"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."
"However, there are some technical features that you have to study and do research on to be able to understand."
"It would be better if the User Interface were updated. At the moment, it's a classic environment. It reminds me of the old Windows interface, for example, Windows 95. It would be better to make it more user-friendly. It would also be better if it could integrate with SAP solutions. It isn't easy to find experts in the field. It's hard to find people around the globe that have the necessary skills and expertise to manage this solution. For example, in our case, we needed someone with refrigeration knowledge that also knew how to use the tool, and that was a challenge. We also had issues relating to erasing. Sometimes, it kept it in the background and didn't erase it at all. We had to review the entire list to ensure that the item was deleted."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy live business process models and capture real-time data (without the need for another product tool) so you don't have to be dependent on other products for this functionality."
"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."
"From what I have experienced when I worked with a process team, we would like to work with dummy process diagrams."
"There is room for improvement in analytics. People don't realize it, but the world has changed in the last six to eight months. Customers want to see AI like ChatGPT and ML capabilities in all aspects of business processes and reporting."
"The price can be made cheaper."
"The free trial needs to have more options for end users, such as including Process Intelligence as a trial version."
"There is a need for more varied access packages. The access packages that I have used are not cheap enough. They also provide a complete set of tools that are not always used. Sometimes, you need more segregated things, e.g., Signavio includes functionality for a company that has not yet matured. Since there are no basic packages, the company must pay for a package that is not fully used. Typically, process management is started in a company of a certain maturity."
"The workflow automation of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The user administration, the user-group administration, and the license models need improvement."
"We very often face situations where Signavio comes to its limits."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's 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."
"Lower than the competition with highly flexible licensing plans."
"The solution is expensive."
"We are only able to use the free academic licenses because we have a financial constraint. We are not able to pay for commercial licenses to use this kind of tool."
"My client purchased one editor license and the collaboration hub, which covers up to a hundred people."
"SaaS has no setup cost, just licensing fees."
"Comparatively, it is a bit costly when you look at similar tools with similar features."
"SAP Signavio charges a lot of money."
"The customer Journey Modeler is more than twice the price of Process Manager, which is a lot."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
23%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
11%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

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.
Which is better - Signavio Process Manager or Celonis?
SAP Signavio Process Manager is a very robust industrial-grade business process modeling tool. It is easy to use and does not require too much technological involvement. This solution has a collabo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Signavio Process Manager?
I am not aware of the pricing and licensing of SAP Signavio Process Manager in the current firm I am working for. However, in my last company, Fidelity International, I was introduced to SAP Signav...
What advice do you have for others considering Signavio Process Manager?
I do use the collaborative workspace feature of SAP Signavio Process Manager. Our stakeholders who are outside of SAP Signavio Process Manager environment do use the collaborative feature because t...
 

Also Known As

MagicDraw
Signavio Process Editor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
DHL, Coca Cola EP, Prudential, Zalando, T-Systems, Jabil, Endress+Hauser, Rakuten
Find out what your peers are saying about No Magic MagicDraw vs. SAP Signavio Process Manager and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.