Qlik Compose Review

Excellent data integration but needs better scheduling and monitoring features

What is our primary use case?

The primary use cases can change according to the company and requirements. We originally began using it as a data preparation tool, where you could do a data migration afterward. 

How has it helped my organization?

To be frank, there is no right answer to this question right now. This is due to the fact that we have not yet deployed this solution to any of our customers yet. This is largely because Qlik has recently come up with an alternative solution. Compose and Qlik Data Catalyst aren't a complete suite. We also haven't gotten any customers to sign onto using it just yet.

What is most valuable?

Qlik Compose has capabilities to do ETL as well as data integration. If you compare with the Replicate, Replicate can do only data integration it doesn't have ETL capabilities.

The most useful aspect of the solution is that you can have in CDC and ETL. You can also take advantage of storage.

What needs improvement?

The solution has room for improvement in the ETL. They have an ETL, but when it comes to the monitoring portion, Qlik Compose doesn't provide a feature for monitoring. They should have some monitoring features included in it. In case of any job failures, the solution should be on an auto-fix. 

There should be the ability to trigger the jobs and schedule them. Qlik Compose can't really do that yet. If you talk about a competitor like Informatica, they do have some scheduling platforms available. 

There are basic features in Compose, but not as advanced features for monitoring and scheduling. Monitoring any scheduling features just needs to be in there in the future.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for almost a year now. The last time I really worked on it was for a POC about 6 months ago.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is stable. When you compare Qlik Compose and Qlik Replicate, if you want to have an integration between the two different sources, it's better to go with Qlik Replicate. However, if you want to have an ETL added into it, then you can go with the Qlik Compose. If you choose that option, you need to be aware that you can't do visualization. If you want to do a complete stack of data integration - with the ETL, as well as visualization - then you need to go with Qlik Data Catalyst. Everything depends upon the business requirements. If I only want the conditioned part, Replicate would be fine. If I required a data integration in terms of only ETL (not visualization), then Compose is better.

As long as you pick the solution that best fits with your requirements, you won't find that performance is a problem. It's good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution can easily handle a lot of data. As soon as you consume the data load, it is easily scalable. 

We currently only have two or three users at our organization that have access to the solution. However, it totally depends on the requirements. If we get the requirement that there would be a lot of users, they need to be trained for deployment and development, etc. As of now, this product is still under exploration within our organization. 

How are customer service and technical support?

I've never contacted technical support, so I can't speak to the quality of their service at this time.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used a different solution, and Qlik has since taken it over. 

I have experience with Informatica, for example, and Snowflake. I've worked with multiple tools in the past. Qlik is rather new to the market.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was not complex. It was quite straightforward.

Deployment is not that hard. You can do it within two hours, or three hours, max. It depends upon how good your knowledge is. For me, it can take even as little as an hour, depending on the setup.

It just takes a few people to deploy it. You don't need a big team. One of my colleagues was a big help. He's a very knowledgeable cloud architect whereas I am an information architect.

What about the implementation team?

I'm a good architect. I have not needed to a consultant. For others, if they needed help or not would depend on certain configurations that may need to get implemented. If you are not from a technical background, then you might require a consultant due to the fact that there are certain parts that need to be stored in configuration files, which need to be done in a proper manner.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm not sure of the exact cost structure of the solution. Potential users would have to reach out to the company directly to discuss pricing. My understanding, however, is that you only pay for licensing costs and there are no ancillary fees beyond that.

What other advice do I have?

We are partners with Qlik.

Right now, I have not worked on the system in a hands-on capacity. I have an architectural understanding of the solution. 

Implementing the product is totally dependent upon the business side of an organization. If a company is just mid-scale or smaller in size, Qlik might be perfect. If you have a giant company, then you should aim for bigger products. Qlik Compose only provides for unique capabilities. There are other solutions, like Informatica, which may be better for larger firms with broader needs. 

I would rate the solution six out of ten.

**Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Add a Comment