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

Collibra Governance vs erwin Data Intelligence by Quest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Collibra Governance
Ranking in Data Governance
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
erwin Data Intelligence by ...
Ranking in Data Governance
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of Collibra Governance is 12.5%, up from 12.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of erwin Data Intelligence by Quest is 2.7%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Governance
 

Featured Reviews

Davy Michiels - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced data quality and lineage understanding with great support
It is mainly for documentation purposes, to document metadata in a data catalog, and also to improve understanding, access, and exploration of data I've been an external consultant, advising clients on IT solutions and helping them implement these solutions, including Collibra Governance. It's…
Roy Pollack - PeerSpot reviewer
The solution provides more profound insights into legacy data movements, lineages, and definitions in the short term.
We have loaded over 300,000 attributes and more than 1000 mappings. The performance is slow, depending on the lineage or search. This is supposed to be fixed in the later versions, but we haven't upgraded yet. The integration with various metadata sources, including erwin Data Modeler, isn't smooth in the current version. It took some experimentation to get things working. We hope this is improved in the newer version. The initial version we used felt awkward because Erwin implemented features from other companies into their offering.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product's most valuable features are cataloging and classification."
"The automation process is very strong."
"The most valuable feature is the discovery process for the data catalog because we get it in a visual format as a way to understand and classify it."
"It helps us build a powerful workflow mechanism where there can be any stewardship, including issue management governing assets using policies, regulations, or business rules."
"It's a user-friendly tool, even for non-technical people."
"The most important feature is the ease of use."
"Workflow is very helpful and assessment are good features. I really like the structure of this solution and how it is compartmentalized."
"The most important feature in Collibra Governance is the ability to gather data or a collection of data into one repository. If a client creates a repository at his place, then it will get updated to the cloud automatically."
"They have just the most marvelous reports called mind maps, where whatever you are focused on sits in the middle. They have this wonderful graphic spiderweb that spreads out from there where you can see this thing mapped to other logical bits or physical bits and who's the steward of it. It's very cool and available to your business teams through a portal."
"We always know where our data is, and anybody can look that up, whether they're a business person who doesn't know anything about Informatica, or a developer who knows everything about creating data movement jobs in Informatica, but who does not understand the business terminology or the data that is being used in the tool."
"Overall, DI's data cataloging, data literacy, and automation have helped our decision-makers because when a source wants to change something, we immediately know what the impact is going to be downstream."
"The biggest benefit with erwin DI is that I have a single source of truth that I can send anybody to. If anybody doesn't know the answer we can go back to it. Just having a central location of business rules is good."
"The solution saves time in data discovery and understanding our entire organization's data."
"We use the codeset mapping quite a bit to match value pairs to use within the conversion as well. Those value pair mappings come in quite handy and are utilized quite extensively. They then feed into the automation of the source data extraction, like the source data mapping of the source data extraction, the code development, forward engineering using the ODI connector for the forward automation."
"There is a wide range of widgets that enables the user to find the proper information quickly. The presentation of information is something very valuable."
"Data Intelligence allows us to automate multiple tasks we had previously done manually, such as restructuring the metadata for our purposes, setting up ETL flows, and defining the data tables we create. It also enables us to standardize our approach and our technical processes."
 

Cons

"There are certain limitations and difficulties regarding the migration of complex data quality rules, as the tool may struggle with lengthy calculations and longer loading times."
"The solution's data lineage is a little difficult and will not support all the source systems on the database."
"It should have more integrations with things like CyberArk because its main purpose is GDPR implementation. We have to have more scope for things that implement more privacy. CyberArk makes sure your credentials are vaulted and your things are secure when you're creating your integrations or connecting to an application. I do believe that they are working on this feature."
"There's a lot of things available in their Data Intelligence Cloud that are not available on-premise."
"The price of Collibra Governance could improve."
"The connectors for metadata ingestion need to be improved."
"The platform can sometimes be unstable, particularly in terms of speed and reconnection issues."
"We had issues during setup."
"The solution's Arabic language processing is limited. The results are limited when you use the interface in Arabic."
"The technical support could be improved."
"Really huge datasets, where the logical names or the lexicons weren't groomed or maintained well, were the only area where it really had room for improvement. A huge data set would cause erwin to crash. If there were half a million or 1 million tables, erwin would hang."
"We still need another layer of data quality assessments on the source to see if it is sending us the wrong data or if there are some issues with the source data. For those things, we need a rule-based data quality assessment or scoring where we can assess tools or other technology stacks. We need to be able to leverage where the business comes in, defining some business rules and have the ability to execute those rules, then score the data quality of all those attributes. Data quality is definitely not what we are leveraging from this tool, as of today."
"The metadata ingestion is very nice because of the ability to automate it. It would be nice to be able to do this ingestion, or set it up, from one place, instead of having to set it up separately for every data asset that is ingested."
"There was a huge learning curve, and I'd been in software development for most of my career. The application itself, and how it runs menus and screens when you can modify and code, is complex. I have found that kind of cumbersome."
"The data quality assessment requires third-party components and a separate license."
"There are a lot of little things like moving between read screens and edit screens. Those little human interface type of programming pieces will need to mature a bit to make it easier to get to where you want to go to put the stuff in."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would say it's probably in line with what other vendors charge for licensing."
"Generally, it is a rather expensive solution compared to some other tools in the market, but I found it to be fair-priced for its capabilities."
"I think they have a trust issue. I did not like the way they recently went through the process. They were like, "Finish this SOW first, only then will we sign the other SOW." Or, "Finish this code." I didn't like that much."
"I think it is on a yearly basis, but I'm not involved with the pricing session, so I have no idea. There are several licenses for different models. You get one license per product, but a lot of features are controlled separately through different licenses. So, as and when you want to use a feature, you have to procure the license for that feature."
"Collibra is a bit expensive."
"Collibra Governance is expensive - I would rate its pricing as one out of five."
"There are different levels of licenses. For example, some users can only do read-only licenses, and others have the stewardship license where they can give access to users."
"I rate the pricing a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"The licensing cost was very affordable at the time of purchase. It has since been taken over by erwin, then Quest. The tool has gotten a bit more costly, but they are adding more features very quickly."
"We operate on a yearly subscription and because it is an enterprise license we only have one. It is not dependent on the number of users."
"The whole suite, not just the DI but the modeling software, the harvester, Mapping Manager — everything we have — is about $100,000 a year for our renewals. That works out to each module being something like $8,000 to $10,000."
"The solution is aggressively priced."
"The price is reasonable and competitive. When you get into forward and reverse-engineering, the cost could go up. However, if you are a large organization, you would probably be able to access different packages. If, however, you don't need forward and reverse-engineering, then the price is relatively cheap."
"The price is too high."
"erwin was at a good price. The federal government wouldn't buy something if the pricing wasn't good."
"You buy a seat license for your portal. We have 100 seats for the portal, then you buy just the development licenses for the people who are going to put the data in."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
9%
Non Profit
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Collibra Governance?
We use the solution's Data Stewardship part.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Collibra Governance?
The price is quite high. Collibra has high initial costs for licensing that can be a barrier to small and medium-sized companies starting with it.
What needs improvement with Collibra Governance?
The platform can sometimes be unstable, particularly in terms of speed and reconnection issues. There's also potential for improvements in AI and AI governance, which I don't see clear use cases fo...
What do you like most about erwin Data Intelligence by Quest?
The data mapping manager is the most valuable feature.
What needs improvement with erwin Data Intelligence by Quest?
The data quality assessment requires third-party components and a separate license. I would like to have better integration around the data quality. I would appreciate the inclusion of a non-struct...
 

Also Known As

Collibra
erwin DG, erwin Data Governance
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ministry of Economy Science and Innovation, Aspen Insurance, Barry Callebaut, Colt
Oracle, Infosys, GSK, Toyota Motor Sales, HSBC
Find out what your peers are saying about Collibra Governance vs. erwin Data Intelligence by Quest and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.