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

OpenText ProVision vs Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
25th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (45th)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Ar...
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of OpenText ProVision is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is 8.6%, down from 11.5% 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 ProVision1.6%
Other89.8%
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

"The stability of the product is very good."
"I like that all the features come as part of a standard license and that one license covers everything."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"However, it is a useful tool for IT people who need to design their solution architecture."
"Ability to use a single shared repository and defined languages, using both ArchiMate as the modelling language and the business language based on the repository contents."
"Sparx is a good tool for extended usage such as modeling or automated testing."
"Sparx technical support is good."
"I would definitively recommend the solution to any IT department as it's very cheap and very powerful."
"Modelling and project-actual-state document generation is, as always, the most critical need of every project, and due to the presenting concept and impact analysis, this is a good tool."
"The solution saved a lot of time, about 30%."
"I am sure that the process of the developing of our product is faster and more secure through using Sparx."
 

Cons

"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."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"My main complaint is that the solution is not open source in the sense that you can't have your own in-house developments."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
"When collaborating with other people, it needs to be more user-friendly."
"We miss an integration tool like ARCSeeker which is intended to register elicited elements in a common repository with all their associations (this was removed last year)."
"When many users are accessing the system at the same time, Sparx slows down. It can't easily support a large team."
"Personally, I had a hard time learning how business modeling works, and simultaneously learning a new tool."
"The presentation graphics need to be improved in future builds."
"More challenging than other tools to maintain documents and document versions for an architecture board review."
"The documentation needs a bit of improvement. What I find is that when I'm trying to do something specific for some part of a project, in terms of documentation, it's kind of hard to get at figuring out if you don't use it all the time."
"It could be more user-friendly. The tools could be more simple to use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It’s the best deal in town, by far."
"We paid 1200 euros as a once-off cost. All add ons and integrations come at an additional cost."
"Use floating licenses strategically."
"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 rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
"This product has a paid license, with a yearly subscription option."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
912,022 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

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: September 2026.
912,022 professionals have used our research since 2012.