We performed a comparison between Microsoft Project Server and Wrike based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like being able to manage the capacity in terms of the resources. I also like being able to share documents and information between teams. It's the best solution for collaboration."
"It is a scalable solution. We have been able to manage larger scale projects easily using this solution."
"The ability to track a project's progress using Microsoft Project Server is the most valuable aspect. It depends, especially when managing multiple projects."
"It is easily adaptable. In addition, it is easily used on mobile applications."
"It can scale well."
"We are able to know what we are doing, how much we have spent, how much time we've taken, and it tells us how much money is left for the project. It also tells us whether we are below or above our expenditures, whether we are below or above our budget."
"SharePoint site integration"
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that the tool's reporting is very good."
"We utilize time tracking and reports most often."
"Visibility and organization are the most valuable features of Wrike."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"It's a very easy-to-use and flexible tool. We can easily write and create queues for different themes. It's very user-friendly."
"We can easily write down the tasks and reorganize them as well as have a progression index. Wrike offers several views including a kanban view and Gantt chart view."
"The product is intuitive. It is easy to learn and update. You can follow the project from the beginning till the end with the help of the solution. The tool helps to update the project in seconds."
"This is a good tool for project progress tracking and sharing tasks with internal and external parties."
"The most valuable feature of Wrike is the tag functionality."
"Stability of the solution is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The product's UI is not very user-friendly."
"The reporting aspects can be improved, which is one of the reasons why I'm using Qlik Sense. In the older on-prem versions, reporting was lackluster, to say the least. Project Online has a better handle on that. However, we will still be using Qlik Sense. We're also looking at an add-on app from a company called OnePlan that adds some additional functionality where Microsoft is not as clean in its approach for things such as portfolio management and some of the trends analysis."
"It should be more agile and more flexible when it comes to customization."
"The solution could improve the ease of access could improve. It can be time-consuming."
"The solution needs to be much more stable."
"The price of the product must be improved."
"The deployment aspect of the product is a bit tedious."
"Wrike needs to be more responsive to community requests for new features."
"On one side, it's very easy to create a task with text, but on the other side, it's not very well-formatted. Therefore, it's difficult to track specific data written in a task. We are making templates, but it's not enough to use a template to know the exact status of different tasks. One thing that we are looking for in Wrike is a better workflow. Because we can only move the status of tasks, we can't really manage workflow and send a task to a specific person. This is what is really missing in Wrike as compared to other tools. We are looking to replace Wrike because we need support for workflow. Another issue with Wrike is that they bring a lot of versions of the tool, which it's not so easy. They bring new versions very frequently, and these versions look similar. For example, we are using robots to read the tasks in the tools, which is problematic with Wrike because it is changing very frequently."
"What annoys me with Wrike and things that I would like to improve is that you need to have a very organized workflow that everyone in the company follows, and only then will Wrike work."
"The product needs to send direct emails to customers updating the latest aspects since it is better to hear directly."
"This solution could be improved if we were able to better analyze how the application consumes cloud resources as this can cause a delay in performance."
"It would be great if they could develop more reporting."
"The response from the website is a little bit slow, and the tool is too expensive for a small team."
"We feel that the actual project reports and roll-ups could be a lot different. We are seeking something more for the dashboard. We would like a high-level dashboard that can be broken down into individual product roll-ups and tasks that are assigned. If you assign someone to a task, it assigns them all of the tasks under that. We want to be able to break those down so that a person doesn't have an 800 task list, for example. We want more separation with that and a higher-level dashboard experience."
Microsoft Project Server is ranked 6th in Project Portfolio Management with 55 reviews while Wrike is ranked 7th in Project Management Software with 58 reviews. Microsoft Project Server is rated 7.8, while Wrike is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Project Server writes "Provides holistic reporting and allows us to keep track of what's going on with projects". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wrike writes "Convenient Tool for Project and Task Management, comes with extra features including Analytics and Reporting ". Microsoft Project Server is most compared with Microsoft Project, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Planisware, Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management and JIRA Portfolio, whereas Wrike is most compared with Asana, monday.com, Adobe Workfront, Trello and Jira. See our Microsoft Project Server vs. Wrike report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors and best Project Management Software vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management 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.
