We performed a comparison between IBM InfoSphere DataStage and Qlik Compose based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The Hierarchical Data Stage is good."
"We are mostly using transmission rules. It has a lot of functions and logic related to transmission. It is a user-friendly tool with in-built functions."
"IBM is stable and accurate to monitor. It's easy to understand to monitor the data lineage from source to target."
"In IBM DataStage, the Transformer is the most valuable feature for me. It enables me to apply complex transformations, generate the gateway key, and map source tables into the session table."
"The product is easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to transfer information via notes."
"It is quite useful and powerful."
"I am impressed with the tool's ETL tracing."
"I have found it to be a very good, stable, and strong product."
"The most valuable is its excellence as a graphical data representation tool and the versatility it offers, especially with drill-down capabilities."
"The technical support is very good. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"There were many valuable features, such as extracting any data to put in the cloud. For example, Qlik was able to gather data from SAP and extract SAP data from the platforms."
"One of the most valuable features of this tool is its automation capabilities, allowing us to design the warehouse in an automated manner. Additionally, we can generate Data Lifecycle Policies (DLP) reports and efficiently implement updates and best practices based on proven design patterns."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features was the ability to integrate multiple source systems that mainly used structured IDBMS versions."
"Qlik Compose is good enough. It is user-friendly and intuitive."
"The interface needs improvement."
"What needs improvement in IBM InfoSphere DataStage is its pricing. The pricing for the solution is higher than its competitors, so a lot of the clients my company has worked with prefer other tools over IBM InfoSphere DataStage because of the high price tag. Another area for improvement in the solution stems from a lot of new types of databases, for example, databases in the cloud and big data have become available, and IBM InfoSphere DataStage is working on various connectors for different data sources, but that still isn't up-to-date, meaning that some connectors are missing for modern data sources. The latest version of IBM InfoSphere DataStage also has a complex architecture, so my team faced frequent outages and that should be improved as well."
"Its documentation is not up to the mark. While building APIs, we had a lot of problems trying to get around it because it is not very user-friendly. We tried to get hold of API documentation, but the documentation is not very well thought out. It should be more structured and elaborate. In terms of additional features, I would like to see good reporting on performance and performance-tuning recommendations that can be based on AI. I would also like to see better data profiling information being reported on InfoSphere."
"The error messaging needs to be improved."
"In the future, I would like to see more integration with cloud technologies."
"The pricing should be lower."
"The initial setup could be more straightforward."
"It doesn't have any big data connections. It would be good to have them because most of the systems are moving towards big data. There should also be a user-friendly way to interact with the cloud. Its loading process is very slow. It takes a lot of time for around 5 or 6 million records, and we are not able to provide real-time data to the vendors due to this delay. Its performance needs to be improved. It is also like a legacy system. It is not updated much. In higher versions, they only do small changes. We would like to have new features and new technologies."
"For more complex work, we are not using Qlik Compose because it cannot handle very high volumes at the moment. It needs the same batching capabilities that other ETL tools have. We can't batch the data into small chunks when transforming large amounts of data. It tries to do everything in one shot and that's where it fails."
"There could be more customization options."
"It would be better if the first level of technical support were a bit more technically knowledgeable to solve the problem. I think they could also improve the injection of custom scripts. It is pretty difficult to add additional scripts. If the modeling doesn't give you what you want, and you want to change the script generated by the modeling, it is a bit more challenging than in most other products. It is very good with standard form type systems, but if you get a more complicated data paradigm, it tends to struggle with transforming that into a model."
"When processing data from certain tables with a large volume of data, we encounter significant delays. For instance, when dealing with around one million records, it typically takes three to four hours. To address this, I aim to implement performance improvements across all tables, ensuring swift processing similar to those that are currently complete within seconds. The performance issue primarily arises when we analyze the inserts and updates from the source, subsequently dropping the table. While new insertions are handled promptly, updates are processed slowly, leading to performance issues. Despite consulting our Qlik vendors, they were unable to pinpoint the exact cause of this occurrence. Consequently, I am seeking ways to optimize performance within Qlik Compose, specifically concerning updates."
"My issues with the solution's stability are owing to the fact that it has certain bugs causing issues in some functionalities that should be working."
"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."
"I believe that visual data flow management and the transformation function should be improved."
"There is some scope for improvement around the documentation, and a better UI would definitely help."
IBM InfoSphere DataStage is ranked 7th in Data Integration with 37 reviews while Qlik Compose is ranked 20th in Data Integration with 12 reviews. IBM InfoSphere DataStage is rated 7.8, while Qlik Compose is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM InfoSphere DataStage writes "User-friendly with a lot of functions for transmission rules, but has slow performance and not suitable for a huge volume of data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qlik Compose writes "Easy matching and reconciliation of data". IBM InfoSphere DataStage is most compared with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, SSIS, Azure Data Factory, Talend Open Studio and Informatica PowerCenter, whereas Qlik Compose is most compared with Qlik Replicate, Talend Open Studio, Azure Data Factory and SSIS. See our IBM InfoSphere DataStage vs. Qlik Compose report.
See our list of best Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.