We performed a comparison between Avolution ABACUS and IDERA ER/Studio 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."There are plenty of features available such as the ability to test applications for issues and a user-friendly dashboard."
"The most valuable feature is that it has a customizable meta-model, which is key."
"Scalable and stable tool for roadmapping and modeling, with a good dashboard, end-to-end impact analysis, and portfolio management."
"There are a lot of different features, but the business/decision-maker feature, visibility, and dashboards are most valuable."
"The product is easy to use and well-structured for the integrations we need it to make."
"You can design using a diagram tool installed on your desktop, a key difference from other vendors."
"The ease of modeling and the ease of showing interconnectivity and relationships is the most valuable. It is fairly simple and out of the box. It is customizable in many ways. It is a pretty good tool."
"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."
"Valuable features include the ability to visually represent what the database tables are going to look like and their relationships. Also, the ability to document the definitions of the tables and the columns that are in a table so that we can communicate what the data is and how it should be used."
"It does the job."
"It's easy to model and has a user-friendly interface. I like the team portal because, once we upload, the entire team can see the model."
"One of the valuable features is inheritance when joining tables. When setting up RI and domains and rules, ER/Studio does a lot of the grunt, boilerplate code that would otherwise have to be hand-coded."
"The data modeling module is important to me because I am a database developer and designer... It's very fast, reliable, up-to-date, so easy to use, smooth."
"The data modeling and reverse engineering features are most important to us."
"This application does a lot of things, as do competitor products, but the main reason to go with this product was the ability to create many automations, where we can improve our work and our process."
"The interface is really simple to use and it allows me to pick and choose which tables I want to reverse engineer."
"While this is one of the most powerful tools on the market it does not integrate well with Microsoft Office or others."
"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."
"Having more control over page size is lacking in this product. Print utilization also needs to be improved."
"In the future, there could be improvements in integration and enhancements."
"They should take more initiative to implement things that competing products have already come out with."
"The reporting could be easier to configure."
"The company needs to update the UML version they are using for the product as it is quite old."
"This solution needs more precise documentation."
"It isn't easy to compare the thousands of tables in the model against the database. The tool should improve the synchronization within the large organization"
"The model diagram because very clumsy when you save it on the team server and the models are very big."
"I would like to upload, a database with about 3,000 tables. It takes so much time and, finally, it freezes the whole solution so that I actually cannot work with that environment. For the data warehouse, it's fine because I have 20 or 30 tables. It works fine. But, when I reverse-engineer the database with 3,000 tables, it freezes and it's hard to upload and reverse-engineer such environments in ER/Studio."
"The screens are a bit outdated. They could use a new look and feel."
"What needs the most improvement are semantic lineage and usability."
"When building the relationships there should be a little more flexibility."
"They allow functionalities to be released before the full tests for catching and correcting errors are completed."
Avolution ABACUS is ranked 8th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 14 reviews while IDERA ER/Studio is ranked 10th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 34 reviews. Avolution ABACUS is rated 8.0, while IDERA ER/Studio is rated 8.4. 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 IDERA ER/Studio writes "The solution has important reverse engineering features, but it needs a single sign-on feature". Avolution ABACUS is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, MEGA HOPEX, Visio and ARIS BPA, whereas IDERA ER/Studio is most compared with erwin Data Modeler by Quest, SAP PowerDesigner, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Toad Data Modeler and erwin Evolve by Quest. See our Avolution ABACUS vs. IDERA ER/Studio 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.
