We performed a comparison between iServer and MEGA HOPEX 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 initial setup is easy."
"I have to think less with this solution. It's simple."
"Good and effective reporting features, which help in decision making."
"Tech support is very responsive. They solved issues within a prompt response time."
"It has helped having data lineage in the business cluster, which is used as control artifacts."
"The most valuable features of iServer are the integration with Microsoft Office and the interface is similar to Microsoft applications making them easy to use."
"There were lots of different requirements, and collaboration and review is one of the biggest things. There is also Office 360 integration, and there's flexibility to use it as a database as well."
"iServer is a solution that helps catalog enterprise architect solutions and catalog information."
"The most valuable features of MEGA HOPEX are the seamless VPA module and the good user experience. There are built-in connections that provide integration with other platforms, such as ServiceNow. There is a lot of customization available allowing a lot of freedom. The solution is updated frequently adding new features. For example, the feature GraphQL can be integrated into other solutions, such as ManageEngine for ITSM solutions. You are able to use GraphQL to connect APIs and query the APIs."
"MEGA offers a more integrated GRC platform to facilitate enhanced coordination between the functions of Risk, Compliance, and Internal Audit on a single platform solution - HOPEX."
"The most valuable feature is the completeness of HOPEX's meta-model. It's a strong meta-model that's rigid but comprehensive. It's a logical fit for our understanding of how we want things modeled in our database."
"The platform is stable."
"The most valuable parts of this solution are the richness of its features and its easy interface."
"What I find the most valuable is the process workflow. It is really good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the reuse of common enterprise components and entities."
"An advantage is its accessibility."
"It runs relatively slowly."
"More visualization techniques and ways to report the data might be helpful."
"We could allocate permissions to use only specific components to the users rather than the entire instance."
"There are other solutions out there that have a better user interface."
"The one issue is that if you want to import predefined work, you need to put the licensing model in. So if you wanted to import work that was done before, you then need to buy a separate product for that."
"The migration tool needs to be included in the main package, and not as a separate license."
"The performance is slow, which is something that should be improved."
"I haven't used this solution long enough to know what areas could be improved."
"In my experience, I've encountered difficulties with consuming custom packages in MEGA HOPEX, which leads to redundant work when deploying them to production. This is an area where improvement is needed. While version six offers better UI and UX, resolving this issue should be a priority. I believe it's important to fully explore MEGA HOPEX's capabilities before suggesting new ones."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"It takes a long time to learn how to use HOPEX. It's hard to work with it because the user interface is bad. For example, if you want to build a complex system diagram, you need a lot of knowledge to do this correctly and make it readable. In MEGA, you need to create a report and it takes a long time to publish it. The publishing is offline. With RDoC, everything is online."
"Standardization is lacking. The Operational Risk Function will be more effective if it at a default level follows established Basel standards for Loss categorization, Risk Assessments, Risk Event categorization, etc."
"The features are limited. I'm hoping in the future the solution will be bigger and include more items. Right now, overall, it needs more."
"Scalability can be a problem sometimes."
"MEGA HOPEX's problem is that it is expensive, but it's a fantastic tool."
"MEGA HOPEX's initial setup could be easier. The newer version is better but they still need to improve the process. The deployment took approximately four to eight hours."
iServer is ranked 6th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 15 reviews while MEGA HOPEX is ranked 4th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 36 reviews. iServer is rated 7.2, while MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of iServer writes "Enables flexible parameters for any process model and has a valuable document management feature ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Easy to use and robust with good features". iServer is most compared with LeanIX, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Visio, ARIS BPA and BiZZdesign HoriZZon, whereas MEGA HOPEX is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio and Camunda. See our MEGA HOPEX vs. iServer report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors and best Business Process Design 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.
