We performed a comparison between MEGA HOPEX 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."Every module sets up the same information in a unique repository."
"We have many use cases for this solution but the feature I have found most valuable is the IT Portfolio Management module."
"I find the IT portfolio management very valuable and helpful."
"The most valuable parts of this solution are the richness of its features and its easy interface."
"The support experience in Latin America is great."
"What's most valuable in MEGA HOPEX is that it follows the reference model where each component is defined. I also like the diagram consistency in MEGA HOPEX."
"Its availability is very good."
"The main feature I find crucial in MEGA HOPEX is the catalog view, which provides a comprehensive visualization of all artifacts in one repository. Another valuable aspect is the availability of out-of-the-box outcomes, such as strategy maps and BPA models, eliminating the need for additional configuration. MEGA HOPEX allows users to focus on specific business areas, like risk management or data governance, providing a high-level overview while enabling deep dives into specific areas of interest. For risk management, MEGA HOPEX allows users to assess impacts, create recovery plans, and track action plans."
"The solution is easy to use, supports SysML and UML, and is able to connect to MATLAB. This is very important for us."
"Customizable and tailored to the environment. Several template frameworks are provided."
"Ability to maintain cross-references for all models in all levels - great tractability."
"The best thing about the tool is that its database is open."
"Its ease of use and the breadth of the toolkit are most valuable. It has an incredible repository of artifacts to work with, and they're all cross-referenced. It works with a whole bunch of different standards. It works with BPMN, which is Business Process Modeling Notation, and it also works with something called TOGAF, which is the Open Group Architecture Foundation. There are different layers when you're dealing with architecture. There is the user interface, application, data, data servers, and all that kind of stuff. You have the infrastructure, hardware, and software layers, and then you have the application and business capability layers. You can model a business process and decompose it into all of the applications, data, and hardware to support it."
"It's a stable and scalable solution. I like that it's similar to Rational Rose."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility and adaptability of Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"Sparx offers good flexibility."
"The interface must be improved."
"I would like to see more regular updates released."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"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."
"MEGA HOPEX can improve process simulation in the BPA module. If the solution was better we would not have to use another solution for this purpose. Simulating scenarios in the future for the to-be processes is in demand. If we can have the simulation engine built inside MEGA HOPEX, we would not have to purchase another license or solution to integrate them with each other. This would be a great improvement."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"The tool's UI should be more user-friendly."
"They do tend to push people to their professional services, instead of helping the customers with their problems. I understand this is their business. At the same time, however, they need to work on fact sheets or offer some program to help the customers who want to implement it themselves and to make it run properly in their environment."
"What should be improved are the integration capabilities of the solution with Bizagi."
"The database management area was not usable."
"It could be more user-friendly. The tools could be more simple to use. It's a very complex solution. Because I am a business analyst, I use these tools to manage requirements, and I make models in UML, BPMN, and ArchiMate, and it's complex. In the next release, I would like to see more integrations."
"This solution has some limitations from a business perspective."
"Not visually appealing."
"The presentation graphics need to be improved in future builds."
"I have found the solution is lacking options. The general usability needs improvement and more compliance to CML definitions."
"Even if there are web-based tools in the Enterprise Architecture tool ecosystem (like Prolaborate), the main modeling application is still a fat client application."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
MEGA HOPEX is ranked 4th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 36 reviews while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 97 reviews. MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Easy to use and robust with good features". 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". MEGA HOPEX is most compared with LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio, Avolution ABACUS and SAP Signavio Process Manager, whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and IBM Rational System Architect. See our MEGA HOPEX vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect 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.