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

OpenText ProVision vs Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect 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

OpenText ProVision
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
27th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (43rd)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Ar...
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of OpenText ProVision is 1.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is 8.6%, down from 13.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect8.6%
OpenText ProVision1.5%
Other89.9%
Enterprise Architecture Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1944672 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director, Head of Process & Functional Architecture, Intelligent Automation at a real estate/law firm with 10,001+ employees
Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration
I primarily use OpenText ProVision to create our end-to-end process repository and library for different parts of the organization, capturing the collaboration process to get the right inputs OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and…
Milan Sterba - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Enterprise Architect at Deepview S.r.o.
Efficient documentation generation through organized model structure with a good price-performance ratio
Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward. Although it's a powerful product with plenty of features, it's not easy for even experienced users to find their way without guidance. This is not the most user-friendly solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"I like that all the features come as part of a standard license and that one license covers everything."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"Ability to maintain cross-references for all models in all levels - great tractability."
"Its ease of use and the breadth of the toolkit are most valuable."
"It really is pretty cheap and you only pay the maintenance renewal, so it is worth every dime."
"In terms of product features, I'm very happy with the support for UML 2 diagrams, Archimate, TOGAF and the collaboration capability using a RDBMS back-end."
"The stability of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is fine."
"It is a handy tool for visual modeling that provides opportunities for analysis, design, and support of models using ArchiMate, UML."
"Our clients have used EA to document the architecture for enterprise architecture as well as for software architecture, with the architectural blueprints in Sparx EA acting as a key reference repository for the transformation projects."
"Solution architecture and design, however the database management area really was not usable."
 

Cons

"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"There are a number of drawbacks. Mainly, the collaboration is lacking to some extent - at least when it comes to how we are using it."
"My main complaint is that the solution is not open source in the sense that you can't have your own in-house developments."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"The Business Process Modeling or BPM feature can be improved to make it more interactive and user friendly because it is a tool for technical people. My current use is only for business process modeling notation and putting in the icons etc. You need to take them in as a class, which makes things very complex. Because of this complexity, it is not an easy-to-handle solution. Enterprise Architect is not very good for mockups. We cannot create user screens and other similar kinds of stuff, which is bad. For these things, we prefer to use Axure RP and other similar solutions. They should either remove this feature from this product or provide some kind of connectivity with Axure RP so that people can do better mockups of screens and import them. They need to augment and strengthen the BPM feature, which is the main feature. They need to put in some elements like artificial intelligence and augmented reality. They should look into such features because these things are coming up."
"From a practical point of view, we need speed and reliability for creating a model and doing some really meaningful tasks such as application landscape, refactoring, etc. These are two primary criteria. Sometimes, when you import something, it creates the object duplicates, or it allows you to do something that you're not supposed to do. For example, validation is missing. This could be frustrating because when you work at a high speed, you need to come back and start fixing things that the tool allowed you to go with, which is not quite good. So, there should probably be some internal mechanisms to advise you about what you're doing and what is probably not the best idea."
"One of the drawbacks is that it is oriented on architecture and not user-presented."
"There was some sort of glitch within the last version."
"Shared environments are a little bit tricky. Looking at it from an enterprise perspective, there should be a much better shared environment."
"Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward."
"The fact that you can do a lot yourself is a plus point, but it also becomes a challenge because you need an understanding of the programming languages to get things to work. It becomes challenging for those who are not very good at programming. You have standard reports, but if you want to make your own reports, you have to program it. Similarly, if you want validations rules, you have to take care of them yourself."
"Customer service / technical support is via email only so is constrained to 24 hour turnaround."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"They have the price on their site for the enterprise version, and we do receive a small discount."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"It's affordable. The only additional cost that we haven't yet figured out is the floating license. If you buy a floating license, you have to have a license management server, which comes at an additional cost that's not discussed. So, we haven't yet used the floating license. That’s because I haven't had a chance to figure that out."
"I use my own license. So, I just bought the professional version, which costs $800 or something like that. In the company where I am working, we have floating licenses. They are probably more expensive. Its licensing is affordable, but we are talking about a large organization, and there could be modelers or viewers of the models. We don't know how much that would cost us."
"This product has a paid license, with a yearly subscription option."
"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is priced well. The price we pay is approximately $20 per month. Other solutions I have found to be much more expensive."
"It’s the best deal in town, by far."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
887,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
24%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise58
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
One of the reasons many public sector institutions in the Czech Republic use it is that it provides a very good price-performance ratio. While it might be cumbersome to learn, it still delivers exc...
What needs improvement with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward. Although it's a powerful product with plenty of features, it's not ...
What is your primary use case for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
We are mostly using the ArchiMate language to describe enterprise or solution architecture, along with a bit of use cases. We are producing quite large models, with over 10,000 elements and relatio...
 

Also Known As

Metastorm ProVision
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Delta Technology, Export Development Canada, Rompetrol, Salt River Project, AMEC, U.S. Air Force, HP Consulting & Integration
OmniLink
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ProVision vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
887,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.