IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs Informatica PowerExchange comparison

"The most preferable aspect would be the elimination of the command, which was a significant improvement. In the past, it was a challenge, but now we can proceed smoothly with the implementation of our policies and everything is managed through JCP. It's still among the positive aspects, and it's a valuable feature."

"Redirection is a key feature. It helps in managing multiple microservices by centralizing control and access."

"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."

"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."

"It is a stable solution."

"The product’s flexibility is valuable."

"Provides a significant amount of control over the landscape and overall implementation."

"It is easy to integrate the solution with other tools."

"It is a scalable and versatile solution."

"Overall, it's a good tool. It's currently number one on the market. It pretty much has all the necessary capabilities to pull the incremental data from the source system, technically speaking."

"The data transformation is the solution's most valuable feature."

"The product's initial setup phase was not complex. The tool is easy to install onto any of the servers, and you can integrate it."

"I would rate Informatica PowerExchange nine out of ten due to its robust functionality within the Informatica ecosystem and its seamless integration with other Informatica products."

"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."

"The initial setup is not easy."

"Setting up Cloud Pak for Integration is relatively complex. It's not as easy because it has not yet been fully integrated. You still have some products that are still not containerized, so you still have to run them on a dedicated VM."

"Enterprise bots are needed to balance products like Kafka and Confluent."

"The pricing can be improved."

"I would like the stability to improve."

"They should make it quick and easy for use of citizen data integration or for people or integrators developing at the customer side. They could be development teams within the business team. For them, the product owners can consider making it a little bit more seamless and a little bit more democratized."

"The solution needs better integration with other tools."

"Technical support can be improved with respect to delays in ticket response time."

"Integration with the largest number of databases and other systems would be important."

"Pushdown optimization could be improved."

"V10.2 is very stable, but we are still struggling to make V10.5 stable. We found services that were down, and PowerExchange stopped working."

"The major challenge associated with the tool is on the infrastructure side."

"It is an expensive solution."

"The solution's pricing model is very flexible."

"There is a need to pay towards the licensing cost of the product. It is an expensive product."

"There are licensing and connector costs. Basically, Informatica is pay-as-you-use."

"The cost of PowerExchange is reasonable. It does not rely on complicated formulas or unrealistic equations. The pricing model is straightforward. There is one component, and real-time integration is included. Some other solutions require purchasing additional modules or third-party plugins for this capability."

"Many users don't prefer to use the product, considering the high costs attached to the licensing part of the solution."

"The product is not very expensive."

"An annual package license fee is required."

"It's expensive. In fact, nobody would buy any product of Informatica if the price was the only consideration. It costs money, and it doesn't come cheap, but it provides value for money in many ways."