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

CloverETL vs Unifi comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 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

CloverETL
Ranking in Data Integration
65th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Visualization (47th)
Unifi
Ranking in Data Integration
55th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Governance (35th), Data Preparation Tools (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Data Integration category, the mindshare of CloverETL is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Unifi is 0.2%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

it_user854766 - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides wealth of pre-defined, customizable components, and descriptive logging for errors
* Familiar, intuitive GUI (Eclipse plug-in) coming from a Java development background. * In-depth, descriptive, and well-laid-out documentation. * Responsive support through forums, even directly from Clover staff. * Wealth of pre-defined components. * All components are customizable. * Descriptive logging, especially for error messages. * Ease of install/light footprint.
Doug Isabelle - PeerSpot reviewer
Good management and pricing but not great for enterprise environments
In a high-density location, we're running into connectivity drops. There may be too many rouge devices broadcasting, and the devices is getting interference from another channel. The only to fix this is to reboot and we need something that reboots on the fly. We also need better security for VLANs and VPNs. There are issues with certain Apple devices. Technical support is not very helpful. The initial setup, which seemed straightforward at first, had to be redone. This may not have been the fault of the product. We're not sure what went wrong.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Key features include wealth of pre-defined components; all components are customizable; descriptive logging, especially for error messages."
"Server features for scheduler: It is very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them. The interface is easy to use."
"No dependence on native language and ease of use.​​"
"Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility."
"It's easy to manage and support the user, our guests, and our customers if they have a problem."
"The controller makes it easy to control everything from one platform. The management is easy."
 

Cons

"Needs: easier automated failure recovery; more, and more intuitive auto-generated/filled-in code for components; easier/more automated sync between CloverETL Designer and CloverETL Server."
"​Resource management: We typically run out of heap space, and even the allocation of high heap space does not seem to be enough.​"
"Its documentation could be improved.​"
"It's stable, but it depends on the office and location."
"There are issues with certain Apple devices."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There is no license. The solution is free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparisons

No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, Oracle, MuleSoft, GoodData, Thomson Reuters, salesforce.com, Comcast, Active Network, SHOP.CA
Big Incites, Cloudera, Flywheel Data, Hortonworks, MapR, Platfora, Qlik, Tableau Software, zData Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about CloverETL vs. Unifi and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.