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

Top 10 SAP HANA Alternatives

Vendor: SAP
4.2 out of 5
Badge Leader
971 followers
Start review

Top SAP HANA Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to SAP HANA based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include SQL Server, Teradata, and MySQL. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

SAP HANA surpasses its competitors by offering real-time analytics, in-memory database technology, and seamless integration capabilities, enabling businesses to accelerate operations and make data-driven decisions with unprecedented speed and efficiency.

SAP Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with SAP, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
SAP HANA Logo
SQL Server
4.2 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
SQL Server
4.2 out of 5
SQL Server offers dynamic allocation and user-friendly tools for flexible resource management and scalability, suitable for diverse environments. In comparison, SAP HANA excels in rapid data processing for big analytics but requires expertise and is hindered by high costs.
Download SAP HANA vs. SQL Server Report
SQL Server has a lower setup cost compared to SAP HANA, which may influence initial budget considerations.
View comparison
Pricing
SQL Server has a lower setup cost compared to SAP HANA, which may influence initial budget considerations.
SAP HANA Logo
Teradata
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
Teradata
4.1 out of 5
Teradata excels in processing speed, handling large datasets efficiently with features like scalability and parallel processing. In comparison, SAP HANA leverages in-memory computing for real-time analytics and seamless integration. Buyers may prefer Teradata for stability or SAP HANA for rapid data analysis.
Download SAP HANA vs. Teradata Report
Teradata has a straightforward, transparent setup cost, whereas SAP HANA involves more complexity and potentially higher initial expenses. This pricing distinction is critical when deciding between Teradata's simplicity and SAP HANA's comprehensive offerings.
View comparison
Pricing
Teradata has a straightforward, transparent setup cost, whereas SAP HANA involves more complexity and potentially higher initial expenses. This pricing distinction is critical when deciding between Teradata's simplicity and SAP HANA's comprehensive offerings.
SAP HANA Logo
MySQL
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
MySQL
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA offers robust in-memory computing for rapid data processing and real-time analytics. In comparison, MySQL, as an open-source RDBMS, is versatile and cost-effective. SAP HANA suits enterprises with complex needs, while MySQL appeals to budget-conscious users preferring simplicity.
Download MySQL vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA has a higher setup cost compared to MySQL, which offers a more budget-friendly initial implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA has a higher setup cost compared to MySQL, which offers a more budget-friendly initial implementation.
SAP HANA Logo
Oracle Database
4.3 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
Oracle Database
4.3 out of 5
Oracle Database is favored for its extensive diagnostic tools and reliable support in large enterprises. In comparison, SAP HANA excels in fast, real-time analytics and seamless integration within SAP environments, appealing to those needing rapid processing.
Download Oracle Database vs. SAP HANA Report
Oracle Database setup costs are straightforward and competitive, while SAP HANA's initial expenses can be higher due to advanced capabilities and infrastructure requirements.
View comparison
Pricing
Oracle Database setup costs are straightforward and competitive, while SAP HANA's initial expenses can be higher due to advanced capabilities and infrastructure requirements.
SAP HANA Logo
MariaDB
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
MariaDB
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA excels in high-speed analytics and is ideal for large enterprises with complex data needs. In comparison, MariaDB, with its open-source flexibility, is a cost-effective choice for small to medium businesses seeking scalability and ease of deployment.
Download MariaDB vs. SAP HANA Report
The setup cost for SAP HANA is relatively higher compared to MariaDB, highlighting a key difference in initial expenses between these two database solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
The setup cost for SAP HANA is relatively higher compared to MariaDB, highlighting a key difference in initial expenses between these two database solutions.
SAP HANA Logo
Denodo
4.0 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
Denodo
4.0 out of 5
Denodo excels with cost-effective licensing, data virtualization, and integration capabilities, making it appealing for medium to large enterprises. In comparison, SAP HANA offers powerful in-memory processing and seamless integration with SAP solutions, ideal for enterprises needing comprehensive, robust data management.
Download Denodo vs. SAP HANA Report
Denodo offers a cost-effective setup compared to the higher setup costs associated with SAP HANA, making it a more budget-friendly option for businesses.
View comparison
Pricing
Denodo offers a cost-effective setup compared to the higher setup costs associated with SAP HANA, making it a more budget-friendly option for businesses.
SAP HANA Logo
IBM Db2 Database
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
IBM Db2 Database
4.1 out of 5
IBM Db2 is ideal for businesses needing robust security, cross-platform versatility, and advanced SQL capabilities. In comparison, SAP HANA provides unmatched in-memory processing speed for rapid analytics. Both offer distinct strengths, making them suitable for diverse organizational demands.
Download IBM Db2 Database vs. SAP HANA Report
IBM Db2 Database has a slightly more affordable setup cost than SAP HANA, which requires a higher initial investment for its advanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Db2 Database has a slightly more affordable setup cost than SAP HANA, which requires a higher initial investment for its advanced features.
SAP HANA Logo
Amazon Aurora
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
Amazon Aurora
4.1 out of 5
SAP HANA excels in-memory computing for fast processing and scalability, beneficial for enterprise needs. In comparison, Amazon Aurora offers ease of use and cost efficiency, supporting MySQL and PostgreSQL. SAP HANA suits large operations, whereas Aurora simplifies cloud-based deployments.
Download Amazon Aurora vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA generally involves higher setup costs due to its complexity, while Amazon Aurora offers a more cost-effective setup with its managed service model. This distinction highlights notable differences in the initial investment required for each solution.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA generally involves higher setup costs due to its complexity, while Amazon Aurora offers a more cost-effective setup with its managed service model. This distinction highlights notable differences in the initial investment required for each solution.
SAP HANA Logo
SAP HANA Logo
IBM Cloud Pak for Data
3.9 out of 5
SAP HANA excels with in-memory processing for real-time analytics, making it ideal for speed-centric operations. In comparison, IBM Cloud Pak for Data focuses on data governance and machine learning, offering flexibility with containerization and robust data management capabilities, appealing to dynamic business needs.
Download IBM Cloud Pak for Data vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA has higher setup costs compared to IBM Cloud Pak for Data, which offers a more cost-effective implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA has higher setup costs compared to IBM Cloud Pak for Data, which offers a more cost-effective implementation.
SAP HANA Logo
CockroachDB
4.0 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
CockroachDB
4.0 out of 5
SAP HANA offers real-time operations and in-memory data processing, ideal for complex analytics. In comparison, CockroachDB excels in distributed architecture, providing fault tolerance and geo-replication. SAP HANA faces high costs, while CockroachDB benefits from manageable pricing and PostgreSQL compatibility challenges.
Download CockroachDB vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA has a high initial setup cost compared to CockroachDB, which offers a more affordable setup.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA has a high initial setup cost compared to CockroachDB, which offers a more affordable setup.
SAP HANA Logo
SQLite
3.6 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
SQLite
3.6 out of 5
SQLite is ideal for local storage with its lightweight, serverless architecture. In comparison, SAP HANA is suited for enterprise needs with its advanced real-time analytics. SQLite offers cost efficiency, while SAP HANA justifies its expense with high performance in data-intensive environments.
Download SAP HANA vs. SQLite Report
SQLite offers a lower setup cost, while SAP HANA has a higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
SQLite offers a lower setup cost, while SAP HANA has a higher initial investment.
SAP HANA Logo
IBM Informix
4.3 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
IBM Informix
4.3 out of 5
SAP HANA offers advanced in-memory computing ideal for rapid data processing and scalability, while IBM Informix stands out for reliability and hybrid data capabilities. In comparison, Informix's competitive pricing suits small to mid-sized businesses, as HANA justifies costs for larger enterprises.
Download IBM Informix vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA's setup cost is significantly higher than IBM Informix, highlighting a clear distinction in budget considerations for enterprise deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA's setup cost is significantly higher than IBM Informix, highlighting a clear distinction in budget considerations for enterprise deployment.
SAP HANA Logo
SAP HANA Logo
Oracle Database In-Memory
4.4 out of 5
SAP HANA's real-time analytics, flexibility, and integration make it ideal for large enterprises, while Oracle Database In-Memory excels in analytic queries and data warehousing. In comparison, Oracle offers robust database storage and analytics deployment, appealing to those needing structured query support.
Download Oracle Database In-Memory vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA setup costs are relatively high, reflecting its advanced capabilities, while Oracle Database In-Memory offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to businesses with limited budgets.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA setup costs are relatively high, reflecting its advanced capabilities, while Oracle Database In-Memory offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to businesses with limited budgets.
SAP HANA Logo
SAP HANA Logo
AtScale Adaptive Analytics (A3)
2.5 out of 5
SAP HANA excels in transaction processing with in-memory computing and data management. In comparison, AtScale A3 excels in connecting to cloud warehouses, offering scalability. While SAP HANA's robust capabilities ensure long-term value, AtScale A3's flexibility and pricing offer immediate, scalable returns.
SAP HANA involves substantial setup costs, while AtScale Adaptive Analytics (A3) tends to offer more cost-effective implementation. This difference can significantly impact budgeting decisions for businesses considering advanced analytics solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA involves substantial setup costs, while AtScale Adaptive Analytics (A3) tends to offer more cost-effective implementation. This difference can significantly impact budgeting decisions for businesses considering advanced analytics solutions.
SAP HANA Logo
Oracle Multitenant
4.3 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
Oracle Multitenant
4.3 out of 5
SAP HANA excels in real-time database management with robust in-memory features and strong security, enhancing supplier relationships. In comparison, Oracle Multitenant efficiently consolidates databases with cost-effective cloning. SAP HANA supports integration, while Oracle Multitenant improves database flexibility and upgrade paths.
Download Oracle Multitenant vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA's setup cost is often higher due to its comprehensive features, while Oracle Multitenant typically offers a more cost-effective alternative with its multitenancy capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA's setup cost is often higher due to its comprehensive features, while Oracle Multitenant typically offers a more cost-effective alternative with its multitenancy capabilities.
SAP HANA Logo
Oracle Java DB
4.2 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
Oracle Java DB
4.2 out of 5
SAP HANA excels with its in-memory processing and complex data handling for large operations. In comparison, Oracle Java DB provides a lightweight structure and easy integration, appealing for smaller projects. SAP HANA suits enterprises needing robust power, while Oracle Java DB caters to quick setups.
Download Oracle Java DB vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA's setup costs are higher than Oracle Java DB, making it suitable for enterprises with larger budgets, while Oracle Java DB offers a more cost-effective solution.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA's setup costs are higher than Oracle Java DB, making it suitable for enterprises with larger budgets, while Oracle Java DB offers a more cost-effective solution.
SAP HANA Logo
SAP HANA Logo
Exasol Data Warehouse
4.0 out of 5
SAP HANA excels in real-time analytics and SAP integration. In comparison, Exasol emphasizes speed and efficiency. SAP HANA suits SAP-centric enterprises, offering comprehensive support and features, while Exasol attracts those seeking quick deployments and rapid query execution with cost-effective pricing.
Download Exasol Data Warehouse vs. SAP HANA Report
SAP HANA incurs higher setup costs, offering comprehensive features, while Exasol Data Warehouse provides a more cost-effective setup with scalable performance.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA incurs higher setup costs, offering comprehensive features, while Exasol Data Warehouse provides a more cost-effective setup with scalable performance.
SAP HANA Logo
DuckDB
4.5 out of 5
SAP HANA Logo
DuckDB
4.5 out of 5
SAP HANA offers an enterprise-level framework with real-time analytics and complex data capabilities for large IT environments. In comparison, DuckDB provides simplicity and efficiency, appealing to buyers seeking lightweight applications with quick deployment and cost-effective, flexible solutions for small-scale tasks.
SAP HANA typically incurs a higher setup cost due to its complexity and enterprise-level features, whereas DuckDB offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to users seeking simplicity and efficiency at a lower price point.
View comparison
Pricing
SAP HANA typically incurs a higher setup cost due to its complexity and enterprise-level features, whereas DuckDB offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to users seeking simplicity and efficiency at a lower price point.
SAP HANA Logo
SAP HANA Logo
Progress OpenEdge RDBMS
4.5 out of 5
Progress OpenEdge RDBMS is valued for scalability and ease of deployment, benefiting small businesses with low setup costs. In comparison, SAP HANA excels with in-memory processing and real-time analytics, appealing to large enterprises desiring comprehensive support and cutting-edge data management despite higher investment.
Download Progress OpenEdge RDBMS vs. SAP HANA Report
Progress OpenEdge RDBMS involves lower setup costs compared to SAP HANA, which tends to be higher due to its comprehensive analytics capabilities, making it suited for businesses with complex data demands.
View comparison
Pricing
Progress OpenEdge RDBMS involves lower setup costs compared to SAP HANA, which tends to be higher due to its comprehensive analytics capabilities, making it suited for businesses with complex data demands.
SAP HANA Logo
SAP HANA Logo
SAS Federation Server
1 out of 5
SAS Federation Server excels in data integration with cost-effective deployment, appealing to businesses wanting quick system integration. In comparison, SAP HANA's robust analytics and high-speed processing, despite higher cost, attract enterprises seeking advanced real-time data insights and future-oriented tech investments.
SAS Federation Server offers a more cost-effective setup cost compared to SAP HANA, making it a budget-friendly option. In contrast, SAP HANA commands a higher setup cost, reflecting its robust feature set and enterprise capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
SAS Federation Server offers a more cost-effective setup cost compared to SAP HANA, making it a budget-friendly option. In contrast, SAP HANA commands a higher setup cost, reflecting its robust feature set and enterprise capabilities.

Related categories

Data Virtualization
Relational Databases Tools
Embedded Database