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

OpenText Intelligence vs Windward Core comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

OpenText Intelligence
Ranking in Reporting
29th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools (37th), Data Visualization (25th)
Windward Core
Ranking in Reporting
19th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Document Generation Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Reporting category, the mindshare of OpenText Intelligence is 1.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windward Core is 1.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Reporting Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Windward Core1.3%
OpenText Intelligence1.5%
Other97.2%
Reporting
 

Featured Reviews

it_user220707 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director & Lead Consultant at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
The Briefing Book feature enables measures to be filtered and viewed based on different criteria by end users.
This software is targeted at executive users, not the data analysts who want to slice and dice. The software will not replace your BI tools, but it will sit nicely on top of a BI tool if you want management to have quick and easy access to performance data. Initiative Management Metrics Management – Key Interfaces
CH
Sr. Systems Analyst at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Strong layout and design capabilities; leverages every aspect available in Word-native formatting
The licensing key is a little bit twitchy. I'd like to see more HTML formatting support in templates. It has a basic stock of HTML formatting capability, but it doesn't have a rich vocabulary. I have to work around that sometimes. The help documentation and blog posts are extensive, but not always up to date. The error reports also need improvement. If you don't key it in right, it's a little hard to find the root cause. It gives you information as much as it can, but it doesn't really hone in and tell you explicitly what you should do to correct the problem.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a comprehensive solution for performance management, and yet it is easy to setup and easy to use, especially in comparison with Oracle, SAS, Hyperion and SAP."
"It has met every aspect we needed it to meet, flawlessly."
"For our clients, it dramatically improves several areas."
"It's easy to create templates and reports using Microsoft Word, so we don't have to learn something new to create a template. That makes it very user-friendly... they have integrated the product with Microsoft Word. People can easily start working on it without too much training."
"For me so far the Windward document generation software is the preferred solution for creating documents."
"You can use Microsoft Office as your designer interface. There is very little programming. You can have nontechnical people create reports."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides good, dynamic document-generation performance and the documents are being generated reliably."
"The design tool, with all of its features and sample output fidelity tests, and being able to work with JSON data and output PDF and HTML, were also both crucial."
"The most valuable feature is the Rich Text or TinyMCE in fields. For example, you have a text field but it is not a regular text field, it is a link. Inside this link, you can copy/paste everything: images, text, and tables together. After saving this field, you can pull it into the document."
 

Cons

"It needs to have better quality built in reports."
"Initial learning curve seems steep at first, but it does click into place after viewing a few of the free webinars that Windward offer."
"The next release could benefit from a cloud-based environment."
"​AutoTag needs to be web-based, so our customers can create reports from our web.​"
"It needs better support for upgrades and more control over layout of elements. Upgrades tend to break existing output. Elements do not position where expected due to insertion of blank lines and page breaks. It takes time to fix these through trial and error."
"It would be nice to have a black-and-white, ideal setup for servers, to maximize capabilities. We went through a lot of scenarios to get something that is scalable. An ideal AWS-package server setup could have saved us a lot of time. But I understand this is very company specific."
"They could make the document creation performance faster. I'm not saying it's slow but it takes time to create the PDFs. If they could make it faster, that would be one area for improvement."
"About six months ago, we raised the possibility of improving the way they manage the HTML 5. Sometimes, when you insert a lot of data in the data source, you get an error because it is not managing HTML 5 features well. I believe they have addressed this in later versions of their product."
"There is always room for improvement in the speed, especially with the complex, multi-line Excel spreadsheets. They made some improvements in the last version that are quantum-fold faster than when I first started. But there is always room for improvement there. You always want reports faster and faster."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Pricing is a bit higher than normal desktop applications, but it's well worth it. The ROI is simple to understand and the monthly payment for an annual license is affordable and worth it."
"The cost is reasonable."
"From my experience in this field, the product is reasonably priced, at least with the RESTful engine implementation. It's definitely not a cheap option. People say, "That's a fair amount of money to pay for a document generation tool." At the same time, you do get good functionality and the support is good."
"For what you're getting, it's an extremely good value."
"Windward is very expensive when the volume of documents being generated is low and it is cheap when the volume is high."
"I'm starting to hear clients squeal about the price of their software. The cost of the software has gone up."
"The only problem with the pricing of Windward is the limitation on the number of reports generated. It is costly in that sense. If you want to increase, you have to pay more, based on the number of reports generated per day. It is not the same with Crystal Reports. With the latter, you buy a license at one point in time and that's it."
"We negotiated our prices many years ago, and while they go up a little bit here and there, they've been pretty steady."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Reporting solutions are best for your needs.
908,402 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Insurance Company
8%
Construction Company
12%
Marketing Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
 

Also Known As

OpenText Magellan Analytics Suite, BIRT iHub Visualization Platform, OpenText Actuate Information Hub
Windward, Windward Studios
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sasktel, NSBSL
HAL, Inc., Axe Group, White Clark Group, Blueprint Software, Aspect Security, Nucleus Software, LeBlanc’s Food Stores, South Sound 911, Aegon, Barclays, Fidelity Investments, ArisGlobal LLC, USDA, RepLink, AON Hewitt
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Salesforce, Plotly and others in Reporting. Updated: July 2026.
908,402 professionals have used our research since 2012.