Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Cegid based on the interviews we conducted with its users.
The top alternative solutions include Workday, SAP SuccessFactors, and Oracle HCM Cloud.
The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.
Cegid Alternatives Report
Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Cegid, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Cegid is ideal for industries needing retail management and financial solutions with a focus on pricing and customer support. In comparison, Workday attracts those seeking comprehensive HR capabilities, advanced analytics, and integration features, despite a higher initial investment for long-term value.
Cegid's setup cost is notably lower, making it more accessible for smaller budgets, while Workday's setup cost is higher, reflecting its focus on larger enterprises and businesses seeking comprehensive solutions.
Cegid's setup cost is notably lower, making it more accessible for smaller budgets, while Workday's setup cost is higher, reflecting its focus on larger enterprises and businesses seeking comprehensive solutions.
SAP SuccessFactors excels in payroll flexibility and goal setting, ideal for medium to large enterprises. In comparison, Cegid's adaptability and strong LMS capabilities suit organizations prioritizing staff development. SAP SuccessFactors presents higher costs, while Cegid offers competitive pricing with comprehensive HR features.
SAP SuccessFactors has a higher setup cost compared to Cegid, making it a pricier option. Cegid offers a more budget-friendly setup cost, distinguishing itself as the more economical choice for initial implementation.
SAP SuccessFactors has a higher setup cost compared to Cegid, making it a pricier option. Cegid offers a more budget-friendly setup cost, distinguishing itself as the more economical choice for initial implementation.
Cegid offers cost-effective payroll management and industry-specific solutions suited for small businesses. In comparison, Oracle HCM Cloud provides a comprehensive suite with global HR, talent management, and analytics, appealing to larger enterprises despite higher implementation costs for substantial long-term ROI.
Cegid has a moderate setup cost, while Oracle HCM Cloud's setup cost is higher, highlighting a significant difference in initial investment requirements.
Cegid has a moderate setup cost, while Oracle HCM Cloud's setup cost is higher, highlighting a significant difference in initial investment requirements.
SAP HCM offers robust automation and integration features beneficial for large enterprises. In comparison, Cegid focuses on essential HR functions with user-friendly interfaces. SAP's scalability addresses large-scale needs, while Cegid's competitive pricing appeals to budget-conscious buyers seeking scalable solutions.
SAP HCM's setup cost is generally higher, reflecting its extensive enterprise capabilities, while Cegid offers a more cost-effective setup for smaller organizations.
SAP HCM's setup cost is generally higher, reflecting its extensive enterprise capabilities, while Cegid offers a more cost-effective setup for smaller organizations.
Cegid excels in scalability and customization for larger enterprises, appealing to those needing complex HR solutions. In comparison, BambooHR offers superior ease of use and integration for small to medium businesses, ideal for companies prioritizing quick deployment and budget-friendly options.
Cegid offers efficient payroll management and accounting solutions at competitive pricing, appealing to cost-sensitive buyers. In comparison, UKG delivers a feature-rich HR suite, focusing on workforce productivity and comprehensive training, making it attractive for those seeking advanced capabilities despite a higher initial investment.
Cegid presents lower setup costs compared to UKG, making it a more economical choice for initial implementation. UKG's higher setup fees suggest a more substantial initial investment, potentially reflecting more robust or comprehensive features upfront.
Cegid presents lower setup costs compared to UKG, making it a more economical choice for initial implementation. UKG's higher setup fees suggest a more substantial initial investment, potentially reflecting more robust or comprehensive features upfront.
