We performed a comparison between Anaplan and JD Edwards EnterpriseOne based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Production Planning solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."You don't need to have a programming language to use Anaplan."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is web-based and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Anaplan is machine learning. The solution is constantly evolving from feedback. Additionally, there is a wide range of training material online."
"Anaplan integrates well into my clients' core systems. The ability to aggregate the forms within the dashboarding is also useful. Only one of my clients has implemented workflow. Their usage has been very light. Dashboarding capability is probably the biggest one. My clients like having the ability to aggregate, slice and dice, and dynamically adjust things in the dashboards."
"The solution scales well."
"Anaplan's strongest feature is that its GUI is very modern and user-friendly."
"Anaplan is a three-dimensional cloud platform that is good for analyzing data, visualization, integration, terrific for visibility."
"It's real-time connected planning, so the calculations are pretty much seamless as far as your model is connected."
"The solution’s Accounts Payable and Procurement modules are the most stable and quite useful compared to other finance modules."
"It’s a stable product."
"Flexibility is the most valuable aspect of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne because it allows customization."
"The product has been stable so far."
"There are numerous good features."
"Access and visibility of different business processes on a single UI."
"It is easy to inquire about any account in our company."
"JD Edwards EnterpriseOne has improved within all the solutions and there have been a lot of investments by Oracle in these solutions. Most of the functionalities, and business requirements, are available for the system in the solution and there have been enhancements to the processes, UI, and tools, which have been done on a regular basis."
"The integration technique should be a little bit easier."
"Anaplan should come up with flexible options to connect to a data warehouse rather than an Anaplan hub."
"The dashboard could be better. Because within a dashboard or report, you have to do a lot of scrolling. You need to scroll down because the table doesn't fit in a single view. That's why even the users aren't happy with that kind of user experience. They need to scroll to see all the data, and it could be better if it fits in just one page. That way, you can see everything. In the next release, I want automation that's connected to Anaplan. For example, to load master data from SAP to Anaplan. I don't know if this already exists, but a log where you can see the progress and see if there's an error will also help. It would be better to give you the error message, for example, if there is an error within the automated process importing to Anaplan."
"One area of improvement is conditional formatting. It's not very practical, and you need to specify additional formatting."
"There are so many business rules to set up in the system that as a business user it's hard to gauge what they're doing and it's possible to get lost."
"The visualization tools in the product are limited in comparison to other reporting tools."
"Anaplan's workflow component is probably the biggest area for improvement. I'd also like to see Anaplan add an ad hoc reporting tool that allows users to query things. It's going to factor into how you design your data set and your models, but I'd like the ability to create ad hoc queries against the data that's in there."
"Anaplan could be improved with a stronger consolidation module."
"The initial setup of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is straightforward. However, it could improve."
"What would make JD Edwards EnterpriseOne better is more straightforward project implementation, including reducing the costs associated with upgrading projects."
"I would like to see the HR features enhanced with respect to localization for South Africa and other countries."
"JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is more of a legacy solution because most of the competitors are or have moved to the cloud. It would be beneficial if there was a cloud version available. Additionally, the interface could improve."
"They have been improving it every day, but it could have more automation."
"If they can research and make the installation part easier or more user-friendly, it would be nice."
"The Fixed Asset module is not desirable because it is complicated."
"The solution could be easier to implement. However, the complexity was in our internal processes meeting our country's requirements. Every country has a slightly different process, taxation, and rules. That was the difficult part, not the solution itself. I expect our experience would have been more or less the same with any ERP, such as SAP, Navision, or Dynamics."
Anaplan is ranked 6th in Production Planning with 24 reviews while JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is ranked 2nd in Production Planning with 55 reviews. Anaplan is rated 8.0, while JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Anaplan writes "Great for large-scale modelling, easy to learn, and very stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne writes "Simplifies processes, is easy to set up, and offers good integrations". Anaplan is most compared with SAP ERP, SAP S/4HANA, Oracle Hyperion, SAP Analytics Cloud and IBM Planning Analytics, whereas JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is most compared with JD Edwards World, SAP ERP, Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP, Oracle E-Business Suite and SAP S/4HANA. See our Anaplan vs. JD Edwards EnterpriseOne report.
See our list of best Production Planning vendors.
We monitor all Production Planning 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.