We performed a comparison between IBM InfoSphere DataStage and Informatica Data Integration Hub based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."IBM is stable and accurate to monitor. It's easy to understand to monitor the data lineage from source to target."
"It is quite useful and powerful."
"DataStage works better with Linux operating systems when the application services are hosted on Linux system equipment, but it's powerful on Windows too."
"The ETL tools are probably the most valuable feature. It has an IBM tool, a friendly UI and it makes things more comfortable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to transfer information via notes."
"The solution's scalability is really good...we are using multi-instance jobs where you can scale them easily."
"Finding logs is very easy on the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the product's versatility to inject data."
"The MDM solution is capable of integrating multiple systems, so it helped us to solve the purpose of centralizing the depository as well as the standardization of mass data. It takes away all the ambiguity around data integrity issues or all the process challenges which happen when every stage of a process uses a different source as master data."
"Performance and flexibility-wise, they're very user-friendly."
"The technical support services are good."
"The template mapping could be easier."
"The error messaging needs to be improved."
"In the future, I would like to see more integration with cloud technologies."
"It takes a lot of time to actually trigger your job and then go into the logs and other stuff. So all of this is really time-consuming."
"There could be more customization options for the product."
"It would be great if they can include some basic version of data quality checking features."
"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 troubleshooting guide is very bad."
"They could provide more robust performance for data integration processes. It would help in improving the data quality more efficiently."
"When it comes to UI look and feel and user experience, Informatica is not as good as other solutions."
"The initial setup was not very straightforward. Not complex, but not very simple either."
More Informatica Data Integration Hub Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM InfoSphere DataStage is ranked 7th in Data Integration with 37 reviews while Informatica Data Integration Hub is ranked 37th in Data Integration with 3 reviews. IBM InfoSphere DataStage is rated 7.8, while Informatica Data Integration Hub is rated 8.0. 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 Informatica Data Integration Hub writes "Excellent at standardizing mass data and capable of integrating with multiple solutions ". IBM InfoSphere DataStage is most compared with SSIS, IBM Cloud Pak for Data, Azure Data Factory, Talend Open Studio and Informatica PowerCenter, whereas Informatica Data Integration Hub is most compared with Informatica PowerCenter, AWS Database Migration Service, Azure Data Factory, Mule Anypoint Platform and SAP Data Hub.
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.