IBM Planning Analytics vs OneStream XF comparison

"The most valuable feature is that it is able to slice and dice the data."

"All the different platforms are well integrated."

"The product's stability is good."

"IBM Planning Analytics is easy to use and deploy. It is quick to develop. The calculation machine is also very fast."

"The most valuable features of IBM Planning Analytics for streamlining planning processes include a unified database where all data are centralized."

"A lot of the platform is in-memory, so Planning Analytics can run calculations quite fast. It also offers several user interfaces. And in the newest version of Planning Analytics, there is a new one called the Planning Analytics Workspace. Maybe it could be useful for the business side."

"Planning Analytics' best features include automatic updates and slicing."

"The flexibility of IBM Planning Analytics is a great feature of this solution. The design flexibility with data rules and defining calculations The ability to combine online and offline calculations are a benefit. Additionally, the forecasting features and predictive analytics is very good."

"It offers great ease of use. This impacts not only the end-user experience but also the administrator's, which affects the total cost of ownership."

"The product's most valuable feature is extensibility."

"We were with Oracle previously. With Oracle, you have to buy a different piece of software for every business process. If you want to do budgeting, that's a product. If you want to do consolidation, that's a product. If you want to do BI type of work, that's yet another product. So, you end up buying a lot of software from Oracle. With OneStream, it is a little different. It is a platform where you can do all those things, and you can do them with just one software purchase and then you just pay for users on it."

"The tool should include features for prediction. It can also improve the scalability."

"Extracting data is a little slow."

"Adding predefined templates could be beneficial."

"The new frontend Planning Analytics Workspace is not very good, it could be improved. I like the Planning Analytics functionality but it would be helpful if it could be more customizable. You can create a prediction and receive information but you cannot do feature engineering regarding the predictive models. If this was added it would be helpful."

"It would have been better if the solution was not just a tool kit."

"The local authentication part is difficult to manage in the product, making it an area where improvements are required."

"It's highly competitive right now, and all the vendors are in a race to put out new versions with additional features. IBM comes out with new versions too often, and it has an impact on quality."

"The dashboard is very poor and needs a lot of improvement."

"We should be able to download the data in the same format we upload it."

"AI is where I see the most innovation and progress, but it's not fully developed yet."

"Currently, they only support one browser, and it would be good if you could use it on Chrome, Firefox, etc. It is a little frustrating that you can only use a certain Microsoft browser. They're pretty tightly aligned with Microsoft. So, I can see the reasons for it."

"I would rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten since it's expensive."

"IBM Planning Analytics is priced well, and licensing costs are yearly."

"Our licensing cost is approximately $50,000.00 per year."

"The license of this solution is paid annually. Most of my customers choose a license that includes support."

"IBM Planning Analytics is not the cheapest solution, but it's priced per the market standard for this type of solution. I rate the price at seven out of ten."

"It is a bit expensive, but you get what you are paying for."

"Compared with the other tools in the market, IBM Planning Analytics is a bit expensive."

"They price it by the user. Before discounting, it is 2,500 or something like that."

"The licensing is expensive."

"The product has a license by the user. They're on par with other competitors."