We performed a comparison between Microsoft MDS and Riversand MDMCenter based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Master Data Management (MDM) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Microsoft MDS is its management."
"It has a very good feature called Excel plug-in. You just have to install the plug-in, and then it directly connects to the MDS instance where you can maintain and manage your data and publish it right through Excel. You don't need to go to the front end to make any changes. It has easy integration with SQL Server, and you can use SSIS to do the ETLs. It is a part of the Microsoft stack. It works with most of the Microsoft stuff."
"The backup and restore functionality are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"Enables non-technical people to directly interact with the BI system."
"The ease of use is valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the administration console."
"The solution is easy to install."
"Technical support is very good."
"It's a stable solution. I have no complaints."
"Has a good user interface and the ability to update large sets of products quickly."
"I like their matching feature, and the survivorship rules are very strong. I also like their out-of-box reports, data quality dashboards, and more. Those are also very handy and helpful. Internally, I like the kind of configurations that we can create, validations, and enhancements. Those configurations are pretty straightforward and useful. It's a user-friendly tool that is very cool."
"JMD repositories have records that come in thousands and millions, which takes a long time to process."
"Most of the Microsoft partners, especially digitally, are separate. Personnel are business people, and they do not have technical expertise, so you end up as a company spending a lot of money training your staff and your engineers."
"The solution could be better integrated into Microsoft's other products."
"The Microsoft license cost could be lower."
"In the next version, I would like to see integration with Azure."
"It would be a better option to have an on-cloud version."
"Microsoft MDS isn't getting strong support because Microsoft is focusing more on cloud solutions."
"More generic related things can be included in the services."
"The solution does not have a good match and search capability."
"Integration could be better. Riversand is majorly focusing on only the MDM hub part. They don't have their own integration platform. We have to rely on a third-party integration partner. They say this is the format, and it's the client's responsibility to bring the data into their required format. They have to have an integration partner and develop their integration capabilities. It's not so flexible to read any data format or system, for example, SAP. They don't have a connector."
"The ability to create bespoke workflows could be improved."
Microsoft MDS is ranked 2nd in Master Data Management (MDM) Software with 20 reviews while Riversand MDMCenter is ranked 9th in Master Data Management (MDM) Software with 3 reviews. Microsoft MDS is rated 7.6, while Riversand MDMCenter is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft MDS writes "Useful Excel plug-in, good scalability, and good integration with SQL Server and other Microsoft products". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Riversand MDMCenter writes "Updates large sets of products quickly; provides good off-the-shelf functionality". Microsoft MDS is most compared with Informatica MDM, SAP Master Data Governance, Profisee, Reltio Cloud and TIBCO EBX, whereas Riversand MDMCenter is most compared with Stibo STEP MDM, Informatica MDM and SAP Master Data Governance. See our Microsoft MDS vs. Riversand MDMCenter report.
See our list of best Master Data Management (MDM) Software vendors.
We monitor all Master Data Management (MDM) Software 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.