We performed a comparison between Google Data Studio and Information Builders WebFOCUS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Reporting solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The ability to design complex data models and equations."
"The ability to integrate with a great variety of data sources."
"I am impressed with the tool's scheduling mechanism, refresh mechanism, and different types of charts."
"Data Studio integrates seamlessly with other Google products, and we can use it with other APIs if we like."
"I find it favorable regarding speed of development, ease of building, and flexibility."
"The solution is free so that is a good feature."
"Valuable features include advanced integrated analysis and easy implementation."
"The company dashboard is useful because we could share it via a link as a reminder for everyone to check it weekly. We observed the progress of our portfolio from last week to the current week, allowing us to compare revenues."
"It stands out for its ability to work across different platforms, support mainframe data, offer cloud integration, automate report scheduling, and provide a robust scripting language."
"I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It's highly scalable and can handle significant data volumes."
"The solution can read and write 500 different types of outputs."
"The most valuable feature is building ad hoc reports."
"When you physically install a product on one machine instead of the cloud, you have a better visibility, best icon quality, etc.. It's more of an issue with how we are adapting to the transition. We are still in the early moments of using this tool, and we need to go deeper to discover some improvements."
"Other tools might be worth considering if you need more advanced features or support for a larger user base."
"The tool should come up with data modeling layer features that are present in other products like Power BI."
"There is a significant degree of sophistication required to compete with Tableau or Cognos."
"Stability and scalability an be improved for a full ten."
"Panels are not as easy to use as other data extraction UIs."
"There are issues with integration and I encountered limits and warnings, especially with my pivot table size."
"Insisting on forums, blogs and community outreach in communications, and posting videos on an established calendar would be useful."
"If there were to be any improvements right now, their documentation needs to get in sync with their product."
"The challenge lies not in what the tool can do but in how you use it and understand the data."
"When it comes to customer support, we don't always reach the right person. Sometimes, we get junior-level reps who aren't as knowledgeable as we are."
"The solution can be improved by adding more automated options for reporting."
More Information Builders WebFOCUS Pricing and Cost Advice →
Google Data Studio is ranked 14th in Reporting with 8 reviews while Information Builders WebFOCUS is ranked 6th in Predictive Analytics with 18 reviews. Google Data Studio is rated 7.6, while Information Builders WebFOCUS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Google Data Studio writes "The cloud environment makes it easier to use large volumes of data and collaborate with coworkers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Information Builders WebFOCUS writes "A flexible mainframe product with unique file features and a rock solid scheduling feature". Google Data Studio is most compared with Amazon QuickSight, Tableau, Looker, Microsoft Power BI and Databricks, whereas Information Builders WebFOCUS is most compared with Microsoft Power BI, Tableau, SAP BusinessObjects Business Intelligence Platform, Alteryx and Databricks. See our Google Data Studio vs. Information Builders WebFOCUS report.
We monitor all Reporting 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.
