We performed a comparison between IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer and SAP Information Steward based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Quality solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."What's most useful in IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer is you can access it from anywhere. It's also pretty easy to learn, so even non-technical business people use it and found the solution easy to learn."
"You can also schedule and run data quality on the critical data elements on the databases."
"The solution is very fast."
"The data profiling was excellent, as was the ease of generating the dashboards."
"Setup is straightforward."
"Ability to collect information, monitor user access and to plan storage capacity."
"Data insight is the most valuable feature."
"The scorecard will highlight the percentage of good data and ensure the user can feel confident that the data is accurate within predetermined limits."
"The most valuable features are data quality insight, metadata management, and metadata dictionary."
"The Data Cleansing and the scorecard dashboard are very valuable. Additionally, the financial aspect of SAP Information Steward is very good. When a rule is incorrect then it will show how much is it costing the business. These features are very valuable."
"What could be improved or added to IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer is more connectors. This solution comes in a package with IBM InfoSphere DataStage and is missing a lot of connectors to various, new data sources, so IBM needs to work on that area. Compared with competitors such as Informatica and Alation which acquired other small companies to work on the connectors, IBM has not done any testing and has tried to develop the connectors in-house, but that's taking a lot of time. As a result, my company is unable to connect to a lot of data sources, particularly modern data sources."
"The solution is outdated and is not on cloud."
"SAP Information Steward could be improved by offering a cloud version of the product."
"Needs to be more powerful on rules."
"The support team is not very responsive."
"A problem with the solution is that it does not allow us to review the results of Information Stewards for other analogies."
"We'd like to see some manipulation techniques included in SAP Information Steward."
"The user experience of metapedia could be improved."
"The solution could improve by incorporating other applications, such as Power BI to show more visualization. More interaction with other solutions would be a good benefit."
"Performance could be improved."
More IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer is ranked 11th in Data Quality with 6 reviews while SAP Information Steward is ranked 6th in Data Quality with 9 reviews. IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer is rated 7.6, while SAP Information Steward is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer writes "Accessible from anywhere and easy to learn even for non-technical users, but needs more connectors and faster issue resolution from technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Information Steward writes "Great for collecting, monitoring and planning storage capacity; functionality could be improved". IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer is most compared with Informatica Data Quality, IBM QualityStage, SAP Data Services and Innovative Systems iLytics Enterprise Data Quality, whereas SAP Information Steward is most compared with SAP Data Quality Management, SAP Data Services, Innovative Systems iLytics Enterprise Data Quality, SAP PowerDesigner and Syniti Information Management. See our IBM Infosphere Information Analyzer vs. SAP Information Steward report.
See our list of best Data Quality vendors.
We monitor all Data Quality 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.