We performed a comparison between Avolution ABACUS and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the traceability, you can trace any object to the other."
"There are a lot of different features, but the business/decision-maker feature, visibility, and dashboards are most valuable."
"It is a very stable solution...The initial setup of Avolution ABACUS is very easy."
"The tool's implementation is straightforward as everything is readily available. For instance, setting up a portal is seamless, allowing easy publishing and access to data. However, integrating with other tools like BI, Power BI, or Grafana requires setting up pipelines between them."
"The technical support is very good. They are responsive and the answers they provide are detailed."
"Scalable and stable tool for roadmapping and modeling, with a good dashboard, end-to-end impact analysis, and portfolio management."
"It's more than just an enterprise architecture tool as it has a lot of nice features, e.g. messaging, simulation, etc."
"The product is easy to use and well-structured for the integrations we need it to make."
"Provides a single repository for all architecture work."
"It provides good utilization and it's a convenient tool for building exact architectural work."
"The TOGAF ADM model is most valuable. It is also very cheap as compared to other options in the market."
"Sparx technical support is good."
"I like that there is support for software patterns."
"The best thing about the tool is that its database is open."
"The most valuable feature of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is the value streams."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is very flexible and it is simple to define the metamodel. Additionally, it is lightweight on resources."
"I use reference models, which are taxonomies, in my EA work. It is a reference model/taxonomy of things with capabilities, sub capabilities, and sub-sub capabilities, so you're working it down. I haven't yet found a simple way to implement that in Abacus. It could be that it is there, but I don't know how to do it."
"The company needs to update the UML version they are using for the product as it is quite old."
"It is vastly scalable but you can't run it on a Mac or Linux so it has limitations."
"While this is one of the most powerful tools on the market it does not integrate well with Microsoft Office or others."
"It doesn't have the simulation capability, which would be helpful in doing some business process analysis and improvements."
"The tool doesn't have any intelligence built in. We have to design the dashboards ourselves, which is a challenge because we have to depend on the vendor for customizations."
"The most valuable features are the catalog and the diagram."
"The usability of the tool is an area with shortcomings that need improvement."
"Greater OMG UML and XMI compliance"
"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."
"The user interface is not so good. It's not easy for someone to use it at first. The product takes some getting used to."
"It can be improved in the area of shared documentation. The idea is that the architecture tool can call back to an enterprise asset, pull that information, and link that as a sub-artifact."
"The window froze for five or ten seconds. You can click and click again and it takes a second to come up. It might have been specific to a version."
"The documentation could be better. Where I work, we speak French and we don't speak English, so we don't have anything in French. It's perfect in English, but we need something in French."
"If you just want to create some diagrams with shapes and arrows, then use Visio."
"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."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
Avolution ABACUS is ranked 8th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 14 reviews while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 97 reviews. Avolution ABACUS is rated 8.0, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Avolution ABACUS writes " An out of the box tool that creates reports on the fly that can help your client make better decisions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Easy to set up and had no issues with stability, but it's not a very friendly tool, and its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement". Avolution ABACUS is most compared with LeanIX, MEGA HOPEX, Visio, ARIS BPA and BiZZdesign HoriZZon, whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and erwin Data Modeler by Quest. See our Avolution ABACUS vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.