We compared Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Ardoq based on our user's reviews in 4 parameters. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is praised for its comprehensive modeling capabilities, a vast library of templates, and competitive pricing. Users have highlighted the need for better UI, documentation, and integration. Users found Ardoq to be flexible in data modeling, collaborative, and easy to use, with some improvements needed in integration, reporting, and customer support responsiveness. Both products offer positive ROI and excellent customer service.
Features: Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect excels in comprehensive modeling and customization options with seamless integration, vast templates. Ardoq stands out for flexibility in data modeling, collaborative platform, integration capabilities, and intuitive user interface.
Pricing and ROI: Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is noted for its flexibility in licensing options and overall value for the price, although some find the initial setup cost to be high. Users find Ardoq to have reasonable pricing, lower setup costs, and flexible licensing options. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is commended for its robust features and cost savings. Ardoq offers customizable features and efficient data visualization, saving time and resources.
Room for Improvement: Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect users suggest improving UI, tutorials, integration, performance, and stability. Ardoq users seek better software integration, reporting, training, support, performance, pricing transparency, mobile app, UI, collaboration, security, and data protection.
Deployment and customer support: Users had mixed experiences with setting up Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, with some finding it simple and others finding it complex. Setting up Ardoq was difficult but doable for most users and took around an hour if done correctly. Ardoq can also be deployed on AWS and Azure for cloud usage. Opinions on Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect's technical support vary, with some customers finding it good while others have not interacted with the team. Ardoq's customer service is regarded as helpful and excellent, especially for paid extended support.
The summary above is based on 11 interviews we conducted recently with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Ardoq users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"This is a useful tool for IT people who need to design their solution architecture."
"We use it to develop and maintain the Enterprise Conceptual Model, migrated from erwin a couple of years ago."
"The company has become more efficient and reduced its budget."
"Ability to maintain cross-references for all models in all levels - great tractability."
"It's a stable and scalable solution. I like that it's similar to Rational Rose."
"It is an EA tool that is approved by Open Group. It is in the tool register of Open Group."
"It is a very flexible product. It can do a lot. It is also a reliable product."
"Customizable and tailored to the environment. Several template frameworks are provided."
"The training environment wasn't very intuitive, but maybe with more use, it will get better."
"Scalability as a standalone system is good, given the information that has been described inside Ardoq. But not the scalability as a third-party system or with integration with other systems. Because in this direction, the scalability is about zero for Ardoq."
"Even if there are web-based tools in the Enterprise Architecture tool ecosystem (like Prolaborate), the main modeling application is still a fat client application."
"More challenging than other tools to maintain documents and document versions for an architecture board review."
"What should be improved are the integration capabilities of the solution with Bizagi."
"When the model is large, it is a bit slow to render."
"This solution should have better ease of use for the uninitiated."
"I think the product is good. When I'm trying to do something specific for some part of project documentation, it's hard to get it figured out if you don't use it all the time. It's such a massive tool, it's hard to figure out how to dig in and get to the documentation where you have to be to get some idea of what to do. There are not a lot of examples that I'm aware of to be able to do that."
"Because its easy to create diagrams one needs to be vigilant on the housekeeping of orphaned fragments - I have written my own scripts to do this, maybe they are available now."
"The areas of improvement should be focused on utility service such as producing better graphics, perhaps having a wider image library set and producing better models for working directly with customers."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
Ardoq is ranked 11th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 2 reviews while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 97 reviews. Ardoq is rated 7.6, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Ardoq writes "Provides stable performance and scalability but not intuitive for data modeling". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Easy to set up and had no issues with stability, but it's not a very friendly tool, and its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement". Ardoq is most compared with LeanIX, BiZZdesign HoriZZon, MEGA HOPEX, OrbusInfinity and ADOIT, whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and LeanIX. See our Ardoq vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture 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.