We performed a comparison between CloverETL and FME based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility."
"Server features for scheduler: It is very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them. The interface is easy to use."
"No dependence on native language and ease of use."
"Key features include wealth of pre-defined components; all components are customizable; descriptive logging, especially for error messages."
"All spatial features are unrivaled, and the possibility to execute them based on a scheduled trigger, manual, e-mail, Websocket, tweet, file/directory change or virtually any trigger is most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of FME is the graphical user interface. There is nothing better. It is very easy to debug because you can see all steps where there are failures. Overall the software is easy to optimize a process."
"We make minor subtle changes to the workbenches to improve it. We can share the workbenches. We don't have to use GitHub or anything else."
"It has a very friendly user interface. You don't need to use a lot of code. For us that's the most important aspect about it. Also, it has a lot of connectors and few forms. It has a strong facial aspect. It can do a lot of facial analysis."
"It has standard plug-ins available for different data sources."
"Needs: easier automated failure recovery; more, and more intuitive auto-generated/filled-in code for components; easier/more automated sync between CloverETL Designer and CloverETL Server."
"Its documentation could be improved."
"Resource management: We typically run out of heap space, and even the allocation of high heap space does not seem to be enough."
"The one thing that always appears in the community is the ability to make really easy loops to loop through data efficiently. That needs to be added at some point."
"Improvements could be made to mapping presentations."
"FME's price needs improvement for the African market."
"To get a higher rating, it would have to improve the price and the associated scalability. These are the main issues."
"FME can improve the geographical transformation. I've had some problems with the geographical transformations, but it's probably mostly because I'm not the most skilled geographer in-house. The solution requires some in-depth knowledge to perform some functions."
Earn 20 points
CloverETL is ranked 60th in Data Integration while FME is ranked 25th in Data Integration with 5 reviews. CloverETL is rated 7.0, while FME is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CloverETL writes "Provides wealth of pre-defined, customizable components, and descriptive logging for errors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FME writes "Great for handling large volumes of data, but it is priced a bit high". CloverETL is most compared with iWay Universal Adapter Framework and Talend Open Studio, whereas FME is most compared with Azure Data Factory, Alteryx Designer, Talend Open Studio, SSIS and Informatica PowerCenter.
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.
