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

IBM Cloud Pak for Data vs Informatica PowerCenter 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

IBM Cloud Pak for Data
Ranking in Data Integration
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Data Virtualization (3rd)
Informatica PowerCenter
Ranking in Data Integration
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Data Visualization (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Data Integration category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Pak for Data is 1.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Informatica PowerCenter is 9.7%, down from 11.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Michelle Leslie - PeerSpot reviewer
Starts strong with data management capabilities but needs a demo database
What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated. There are so many components to data management, and more often than not, people understand one thing really well. They may understand DataStage and how to move data around, but they do not see the impact of moving data incorrectly. They also do not see the impact of everyone understanding a piece of data in the same way. I would love Cloud Pak to come with a demo database that illustrates the different components of data management in a logical way, so I can see the whole picture instead of just the area I'm specializing in. It would be great if Cloud Pak, from a data modeling point of view, allowed us to import our PDMs, for example. It would be ideal to import and create business terms in Cloud Pak. The PEA would be great to create the technical data. The association between the business and the technical metadata could then be automated by pulling it through from your ACE models. The data modeling component is available in Cloud Pak. Additionally, when it comes to Cloud Pak, even though it has the NextGen DataStage built into it, there is Cloud Pak for data integration as well. Currently, I do not think we have a full enough understanding of how CP4D and CP4I can enhance each other.
Lars Borchers - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and reliable product that provides a variety of features for data integration
The solution is not for newcomers. It has an old touch. The solution must improve the integration with new services. It was part of the program at Informatica when they moved to their cloud platform. It is integrated. However, from an on-premise perspective, we need to buy licenses for PowerExchange. If we want a native driver to access a special service, we need to extend our license to those services. It is expensive. I don't like that it's not all included in the solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources."
"I love the way that I can start at a very basic level with my data management journey by capturing my policies, justifying my data, and putting them into different categories to say this is data relating to individuals, for example, or data relating to geography."
"The most valuable features are data virtualization and reporting."
"Cloud Pak's most valuable features are IBM MQ, IBM App Connect, IBM API Connect, and ISPF."
"Its data preparation capabilities are highly valuable."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten."
"Cloud Pak is a very, very, very good system."
"What I found most helpful in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is containerization, which means it's easy to shift and leave in terms of moving to other clouds. That's an advantage of IBM Cloud Pak for Data."
"The ability to scale through partitions helped us to improve the performance."
"Easy, scalable, robust platform to integrate heterogeneous source platform's data into the unified data warehouse."
"The performance and design of Informatica have been very valuable. I find the performance faster than, say, Oracle Data Integrator or DataStage."
"The features I find most valuable is that the solution is very user-friendly and the graphical design is very easy to understand."
"UI-based ability to create data mapping."
"It is UI friendly and has all the advantages of an ETL tool."
"I like the automated scheduling feature."
"The setup is straightforward."
 

Cons

"One thing that bugs me is how much infrastructure Cloud Pak requires for the initial deployment. It doesn't allow you to start small. The smallest permitted deployment is too big. It's a huge problem that prevents us from implementing the solution in many scenarios."
"The technical support could be a little better."
"The product is trying to be more maturity in terms of connectors. That, I believe, is an area where Cloud Pak can improve."
"Cloud Pak would be improved with integration with cloud service providers like Cloudera."
"One challenge I'm facing with IBM Cloud Pak for Data is native features have been decommissioned, such as XML input and output. Too many changes have been made, and my company has around one hundred thousand mappings, so my team has been putting more effort into alternative ways to do things. Another area for improvement in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is that it's more complicated to shift from on-premise to the cloud. Other vendors provide secure agents that easily connect with your existing setup. Still, with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, you have to perform connection migration steps, upgrade to the latest version, etc., which makes it more complicated, especially as my company has XML-based mappings. Still, the XML input and output capabilities of IBM Cloud Pak for Data have been discontinued, so I'd like IBM to bring that back."
"The product must improve its performance."
"The interface could improve because sometimes it becomes slow. Sometimes there is a delay between clicks when using the software, which can make the development process slow. It can take a few seconds to complete one action, and then a few more seconds to do the next one."
"The solution's catalog searching or map search needs to be improved."
"If you want to transfer a ZIP file, it is a pain. You need to use Command-Line. Sometimes we just want to transfer a file. It should be easy to move them from A to B."
"Some of the conversions are done inside the product. We use work tables that are created by the engine itself, but the names of the work tables are very long, and they don't have any meaning, which makes it a bit difficult to understand and follow exactly what is happening inside."
"Requires an established data center because there is no option for software as a service."
"The solution must improve the integration with new services."
"Lacks ability to calculate cost of the product."
"In the future, I would like to see Informatica PowerCenter integrate a more powerful dashboard."
"I found it is kind of weird that not all of the mapping changes are treated as true changes."
"The licensing cost for Informatica is very high. Other all-in-one solutions have much lower prices than Informatica."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing is competitive with that of other vendors."
"For the licensing of the solution, there is a yearly payment that needs to be made. Also, since it is expensive, cost-wise, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten."
"It's quite expensive."
"Cloud Pak's cost is a little high."
"I think that this product is too expensive for smaller companies."
"The solution is expensive."
"IBM Cloud Pak for Data is expensive. If we include the training time and the machine learning, it's expensive. The cost of the execution is more reasonable."
"I don't have the exact licensing cost for IBM Cloud Pak for Data, as my company is still finalizing requirements, including monthly, yearly, and three-year licensing fees. Still, on a scale of one to five, I'd rate it a three because, compared to other vendors, it's more complicated."
"We have found the pricing very cost-effective. The licensing is CPU and data source-based."
"The pricing is a little expensive, but in the same range as IBM and other competitors."
"Licensing is a one time cost. But maintenance costs depend on what you want, how long you need it. Maintenance is a kind of insurance. With health insurance, you don't know whether you will get sick or need to go to hospital or not but you have to have insurance. It's the same thing with support. If you have that expertise in resolving issues, if you have enough experience in your IT department, I would say you don't need the support. But in practice, they recommend you go with the support. If you want support you have to pay for it."
"The licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"The solution is in the middle price range compared to other solutions."
"The license model is CPU based."
"We are using an annual license for Informatica PowerCenter."
"The price could be better. It's very expensive. On a scale from one to five, I would give Informatica PowerCenter's price a one."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user90069 - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 20, 2014
Informatica PowerCenter vs. Microsoft SSIS - each technology has its advantages but also have similarities
Technology has made it easier for businesses to organize and manipulate data to get a clearer picture of what’s going on with their business. Notably, ETL tools have made managing huge amounts of data significantly easier and faster, boosting many organizations’ business intelligence operations…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
The setup cost is very expensive. The cost depends on the pieces of the solution I'm using, how much data I have, and whether it's on the cloud or on-prem.
What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated. There are so many components to data...
How does Azure Data Factory compare with Informatica PowerCenter?
Azure Data Factory is flexible, modular, and works well. In terms of cost, it is not too pricey. It offers the stability and reliability I am looking for, good scalability, and is easy to set up an...
Which is better - SSIS or Informatica PowerCenter?
SSIS PowerPack is a group of drag and drop connectors for Microsoft SQL Server Integration Services, commonly called SSIS. The collection helps organizations boost productivity with code-free compo...
Which Informatica product would you choose - PowerCenter or Cloud Data Integration?
Complex transformations can easily be achieved using PowerCenter, which has all the features and tools to establish a real data governance strategy. Additionally, PowerCenter is able to manage huge...
 

Also Known As

Cloud Pak for Data
PowerCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Qatar Development Bank, GuideWell, Skanderborg Music Festival
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, LexisNexis, Rabobank
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Pak for Data vs. Informatica PowerCenter and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.