Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cegid vs PageUp People comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cegid
Ranking in Talent Management
21st
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Cloud HCM (18th)
PageUp People
Ranking in Talent Management
36th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Talent Acquisition (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Talent Management category, the mindshare of Cegid is 0.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PageUp People is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Talent Management
 

Featured Reviews

Valda Coelho - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhancing HR engagement with effective development but could benefit from AI-driven improvements
The primary feature I appreciate about the solution is the information connection, allowing us to have a full employee life cycle visibility over the platforms. It also enables the creation of interactions between employees, launching communication campaigns that raise engagement. From the HR side, the most valuable features are the Learning Management Systems (LMS) that allow providing a personalized service in terms of development, where each employee can choose and architect their development plans. The second valuable feature is the autonomy each employee has to update their personal data. In terms of talent management, it helps design development processes, backups, and clearly view the criteria for those backups being achieved.
it_user594666 - PeerSpot reviewer
Candidate management supports the process from the application stage through offer, onboarding, learning and performance management.
Reporting could be improved. Some changes were made to functionality a year or two ago, and whilst there have certainly been some improvements in some areas (in terms of the dashboard view, for example), we have experienced some difficulty in trying to automate some fairly standard reports to be sent out to our hiring areas regarding current recruitment in their respective areas.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the payment engine."
"The solution is very helpful as it allows us to optimize and consolidate all the data for talent management."
"From the HR side, the most valuable features are the Learning Management Systems (LMS) that allow providing a personalized service in terms of development, where each employee can choose and architect their development plans."
"The tool provides a lot of options."
"The support team were friendly and work in a systematic way. When contacting support you are able to add a level of priority to your case which is always respected by their team."
"Performance appraisal might be the most valuable feature for us."
"It helps to optimize some workflows and provides reporting capabilities."
"The performance appraisal is the most valuable feature."
"The talent acquisition and the onboarding components of the system are most valuable."
 

Cons

"The HR portal, training model, and development career model could all use improvement. Stability and scalability should be improved as well."
"Meta4 could improve by allowing users to manage things by themself."
"The user interface could be improved and the maintenance is complex when it comes to upgrades."
"There are difficulties regarding the reporting part."
"The solution is a little bit slow."
"The HR portal, training model, and the development career model all need improvement."
"In future releases, it would be useful to see reporting lines of all the team members in our business to understand who reports to whom."
"I would like to have recruitment and acquisition features added to this solution."
"They could probably add surveying, as in engagement surveys, to their product. That would be something that would be valued by their customers. For instance, Culture Amp is a product that does a lot of the engagement stuff. They're diversifying into other aspects of talent management. It is not yet at the same scale as PageUp People, but it is an excellent product as well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Meta4 requires annual maintenance that needs to be paid for."
"From a cost perspective, I think this is a well-balanced option."
"PageUp has a different model from other organizations. As part of their pricing structure, they tend to work with you very closely and not charge you for the setup. So, there is one price all inclusive of setup, and for that reason, they become an attractive provider to work with. Here in Australia, the education sector has gravitated very heavily towards PageUp."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Talent Management solutions are best for your needs.
845,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Retailer
17%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What advice do you have for others considering Cegid?
I would recommend Cegid for a small company. I rate the overall solution a six out of ten.
What do you like most about Cegid?
The tool provides a lot of options.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

TalentSoft, Meta4
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aeroports de Paris, Arkadin, Ingenico Payment Services, Bollor_ Group, Bull, FDJ, Limagrain
MYER, Target, coles, Fujitsu, Michael Hill
Find out what your peers are saying about Cegid vs. PageUp People and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
845,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.