We performed a comparison between Bizagi and erwin Data Modeler by Quest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Business process modelling and simulation."
"The free online Help and E-Learning is very strong."
"Bizagi is flexible. I can share things with other consultants because it is the most commonly used software in my community. It has been a great and good resource for us in making sure that we adhere to the process."
"Great software for managing my business. I think this is the best business process management software."
"This is a free solution that allows us to create quality visualizations for our company."
"Your team can work on it having basic training about databases and BPM modeling."
"Agility is most valuable because we can develop so much faster than other tools. We can make requirements, develop, and go out to production much faster. So, agility in the software cycle is most valuable."
"It is easy to use and easy to learn. It is also fully compatible with BPMN virtual tool. Bizagi is very fast in responding to and fixing the issues."
"The data lineage feature is very valuable."
"Forward engineering, DDL generation, reverse engineering, and reporting are the most valuable features of the solution."
"It allows us to create logical data models. We can represent a database model in business terms, which is very useful for us."
"Being able to point it to a database and then pull the metadata is a valuable feature. Another valuable feature is being able to rearrange the model so that we can display it to users. We are able to divide the information into subject areas, and we can divide the data landscape into smaller chunks, which makes it easier to understand. If you had 14 subject areas, 1,000 entities, and 6,000 columns, you can't quite understand it all at once. So, being able to have the same underlying model but only display portions of it at a time is extremely useful."
"We use the Forward and Reverse Engineering tools to help us speed things up and create things that would have to be done otherwise by hand. E.g., getting a database into a data model format or vice versa."
"We had some data integration projects, where we needed to integrate it for about 100 databases. Doing that manually is crazy; we can't do that. With erwin, it was much easier to identify which tables and columns could be used for the integration. That means a lot in terms of time and effort as well as my image to the customer, because they can see that we are providing value in a very short time."
"Any tool will do diagramming but I think the ability to put the stuff up in a graphical fashion, then think about it, and keep things consistent is what's valuable about it. It's too easy when you're using other methods to not have naming consistent standards and column consistent definitions, et cetera."
"The product lets us import different types of models from various databases."
"Bizagi has been aggressively adding features to maintain its market-leading position, however, in some cases, this has impacted the stability of certain product builds."
"One of the features which could be improved is machine learning. Even though this product has been working on this topic, we can see that it still requires improvement."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the costs can be lowered."
"I would like to see a facility for building a simple CRUD application. In Bizagi, you can use database modeling, diagrams, forms, etc., but in some circumstances I need CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) functionalities which are not there yet."
"I would like to see simulation as a free feature again. In version 3.3 it was free, but in 4.0 it isn't."
"Bizagi doesn't have integrations with other solutions, such as ERP systems. In the industry and your company, you have a lot of systems with which you need to integrate, but Bizagi doesn't have such integrations, which makes it very difficult. Its scalability can also be improved. It is good for a startup, but when you need something more complex, it is not good."
"From a developer's point of view, an improvement in the layout would make the UI better."
"There could be more documentation."
"The navigation is a little bit of a challenge. It's painful. For example, if you've got a view open and you want to try to move from side to side, the standard today is being able to drag and drop left and right. You can't really do that in the model. Moving around the model is painful because it doesn't follow the Windows model today."
"It is not a very stable solution. I rate the stability five out of ten."
"The Bulk Editor needs improvement. If you had something that was a local model to your local machine, you could connect to the API, then it would write directly into the repository. However, when you have something that is on the centralized server, that functionality did not work. Then, you had to export out to a CSV and upload up to the repository. It would have been nice to be able to do the direct API without having that whole download and upload thing. Maybe I didn't figure it out, but I'm pretty sure that didn't work when it was a model that sat on a centralized repository."
"The solution's reporting side needs to be improved."
"I would like to see more support for working with the big-data world. There are so many new databases evolving and it's very hard for them to keep up with all of the new technologies. It would be good if they were able to dynamically support big-data platforms, other than Hive and Teradata."
"I would like to see improved reporting and, potentially, dashboards built on top of that. Right now, it's a little manual. More automated reporting and dashboard views would help because currently you have to push things out to a spreadsheet, or to HTML, and there aren't many other options that I know of. I would like to be able to produce graphs and additional things right in the tool, instead of having to export the data somewhere else."
"I still use Visio for conceptual modeling, and that's mainly because it is easier to change things, and you can relax some of the rules. DM's eventual target is a database, which means you actually have to dot all the Is and cross all the Ts, but in a conceptual model, you don't often know what you're working with. So, that's probably a constraint with erwin. They have made it a lot easier, and they've done a lot, but there is probably still room for improvement in terms of the ease of presentation back to the business. I'm comparing it with something like Visio where you can change colors on a box, change the text color and that sort of stuff, and change the lines. Such things are a whole lot easier in Visio, but once you get a theme organized in erwin, you can apply that theme to all of the objects. So, it becomes easier, but you do have to set up that theme."
"The only real complaint I have is the time it takes to do a database comparison on a large model. If they could speed that up, that would be the only thing I can think of that needs improvement."
Bizagi is ranked 5th in Business Process Design with 78 reviews while erwin Data Modeler by Quest is ranked 9th in Business Process Design with 37 reviews. Bizagi is rated 8.4, while erwin Data Modeler by Quest is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Bizagi writes "A flexible, customizable solution that reduced time to market, but the UI and customer support could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of erwin Data Modeler by Quest writes "The product lets users import different types of models, but it is expensive, and the interface must be improved". Bizagi is most compared with Camunda, Visio, Bonita, Microsoft Power Apps and ARIS BPA, whereas erwin Data Modeler by Quest is most compared with SAP PowerDesigner, IDERA ER/Studio, Visio, Lucidchart and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect. See our Bizagi vs. erwin Data Modeler by Quest report.
See our list of best Business Process Design vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.
