Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Sparx Prolaborate 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

Sparx Prolaborate
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
17th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sparx Systems Enterprise Ar...
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of Sparx Prolaborate is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is 11.3%, down from 15.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect11.3%
Sparx Prolaborate1.2%
Other87.5%
Enterprise Architecture Management
 

Featured Reviews

Sastry Dhara - PeerSpot reviewer
Good extensibility, but there should be more cloud capabilities
Its extensibility is most valuable. There should be more cloud capabilities. We worked with this solution for two or three years. There are no stability issues. It is scalable. Their support is good. It was straightforward. I would rate it a seven out of ten. On-premises
Milan Sterba - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"Sparx Prolaborate is user-friendly, easy to use, and has good documentation."
"What is really powerful in Sparx is the way in which you can model business processes. You can link business processes to organizational objectives. You can also take those business processes and link them to specific product features that you want to deliver."
"It is valuable to have diagrams available in real time."
"Its extensibility is most valuable."
"It allows us to give a better description of our project than using the written word."
"It's easy to search within the solution."
"I have found the Meta Model tuning feature useful as it provides me with an overview of all my work needs."
"There are a lot of features in Enterprise Architect. It allows us to take on a lot of tasks."
"Artifact templates are most valuable."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility and adaptability of Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"The platform is stable and reliable."
"It provides good utilization and it's a convenient tool for building exact architectural work."
"Automated document generation is a real time saver, no more cut and paste, no more keeping track of which diagrams are in which reports, no more last minute update panics. Just click a mouse and you've got an up to date report."
 

Cons

"A lot of product teams use a lot of visualizations for mapping out the product roadmap, brainstorming, or understanding the vision of the product, but Sparx is not a great visualization tool. Sparx has to improve the way for visualizing processes, journeys, software designs, etc. It would really benefit the product management teams or even enterprise architects."
"In the next release, there should be more editable objects. We find Sparx Prolaborate very user-friendly, and having more features that are in the Enterprise Architect would be great, such as managing different versions of diagrams."
"There should be more cloud capabilities."
"The product is not very user-friendly."
"The solution could offer different sources for design."
"Weak in regards to data modelling. No logical or physical modelling or migration from conceptual to physical."
"No way to implement data integrity and referential integrity constraints."
"The templates for documentation should be enhanced to include complex documents such as template RFP, or Non functional requirements template."
"They should make the Save button easier to find. A simplified user interface for a lighter user would probably be useful. I am not sure if such an interface is already there."
"The dashboard and connectivity could be improved."
"It could be more user-friendly. The tools could be more simple to use. It's a very complex solution. Because I am a business analyst, I use these tools to manage requirements, and I make models in UML, BPMN, and ArchiMate, and it's complex. In the next release, I would like to see more integrations."
"One room for improvement in Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is that it's not very friendly. Another room for improvement in the tool is that it doesn't enable you to import the metadata from a database very easily, so reverse engineering of a database was very difficult. Its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement."
"What should be improved are the integration capabilities of the solution with Bizagi."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is expensive."
"The price of Sparx Prolaborate is good."
"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."
"We paid 1200 euros as a once-off cost. All add ons and integrations come at an additional cost."
"Licenses are pretty low cost compared to, for example, ARIS."
"The license for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is paid yearly, but I don't handle that area. It's good for its price, so I'm rating it a five out of five, but I'm not using it much. I also don't have information regarding additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees."
"The Corporate Edition, or one of the bundles, is the way to go."
"It's reasonably priced for large organizations."
"The licensing is not as expensive as some of the other data modeling tools such as Erwin."
"It is cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
872,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Real Estate/Law Firm
12%
Insurance Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business38
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise58
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
The stability has been good and satisfactory. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.
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 ...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
OmniLink
Find out what your peers are saying about Sparx Prolaborate vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
872,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.