No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Jedox vs Oracle Hyperion 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

Jedox
Ranking in Business Performance Management
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Oracle Hyperion
Ranking in Business Performance Management
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
58
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Business Performance Management category, the mindshare of Jedox is 3.2%, down from 5.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Hyperion is 4.3%, down from 8.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Performance Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Oracle Hyperion4.3%
Jedox3.2%
Other92.5%
Business Performance Management
 

Featured Reviews

Riyaz Halani - PeerSpot reviewer
Financial Controller at Zalando SE
Powerful BI tool for analyzing financial performance and stable performance
I would rate the scalability of Jedox a seven out of ten. There is room for improvement in the scalability. It is a very massive tool. It's not easy to just build everything yourself. So that's where the main improvements lie—making it easy for people to not depend on just technical finance teams. There are almost 50 to 60 users using Jedox in our organization.
SC
Product Support Engineer at JSW
Empower financial planning with user-friendly and robust features
The best features of Oracle Hyperion revolve around their cloud-based technology, which is gradually moving to cloud solutions such as EPMCSG, while Anaplan uses two engines for calculations, the classic engine and the Essbase engine. Anaplan allows for quick module changes, where adjustments in one module reflect throughout the user experience. In contrast, Oracle Hyperion relies on Essbase as a database with calculation scripts and business rules, and it incorporates Smart View technology for Excel connections, providing a familiar interface for users. Oracle Hyperion is fundamentally a good technology and does not require significant improvements compared to other technologies because it is user-friendly and offers several advantages in financial reporting and consolidation. However, I have observed that Anaplan has built-in UX pages for report preparation, unlike Oracle Hyperion, which often relies on third-party tools such as Hyperion Financial Reporting and Power BI for reporting.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The system is quite flexible. Based on our requirements, we create different cubes that can help us to do complete planning."
"The data entry point is most valuable, and the way we can customize our report or do data entry is very good."
"The data entry point is most valuable. The way we can customize our report or do data entry is very good."
"The customer porting is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is very versatile."
"With Jedox, those kinds of pain points have been removed, and now if I create my dashboard once, people just need to add the data or pull the data, or the data just comes in on a scheduled basis from various systems, and my dashboards are ready."
"We use the tool for performance management and planning."
"The ease of reporting is one of Jedox's most valuable features."
"The return on investment for this solution is good."
"The implementation has been simplified now that it's deployed in the cloud. Also, Hyperion is tightly integrated with Oracle products because Oracle owns it now."
"Oracle has an integrated solution for Enterprise Performance Management (EPM) and Hyperion. It keeps the two platforms opened up to each other."
"So far, the stability has been fine."
"Since it is an enterprise-capable solution, people are not worried about security, giving data, the ability to manage complex consolidation, and its ability to modify reporting."
"This is a customizable product, and our implementation was designed to fit our needs."
"The roll-up potential of the product is very good, meaning we have detailed information and we want it to be summarized, based on geography, based on different product lines, or based on different charts of accounts in the general ledger. It rolls up the information in a very concise way. This makes it easy to understand the overall performance, for it's forecasting aspects, or quarterly reporting, year to year, or month to month reporting."
"My primary use case of this solution is as a full EPM shop, with HFM, planning and FDMEE reports, as well as all the features available under the EPM umbrella."
 

Cons

"I don't find it particularly user-friendly."
"From a development perspective, there's room for improvement in the area called the designer, where you actually build your reports to make it easier to manage the process."
"Visualization is something they need to improve. There should be some dropdown facilities in it like Excel."
"There is not much training for Jedox."
"There is room for improvement in the scalability. It is a very massive tool. It's not easy to just build everything yourself."
"I think it's the design of the report because the design and the UI for the report is standard and lame. When you see a Jedox report, it doesn't seem like it's from today, because the technology is something from the last decade. The scalability needs improvement."
"Visualization is something they need to improve. We have already told them about this, and they should be working on it."
"The tool has changed its pricing and it's now too expensive for small and medium organizations. I miss the open-source version which was free and we could do a lot of things with it."
"The technical support for EPM is bad."
"What I like is to have everything on one platform and not in different modules like Oracle Hyperion."
"Because my organization is complex and there are different data streams, they don't bolt into Hyperion very well."
"The learning curve is pretty steep."
"Oracle support has a lot of room for improvement. Our requests for service, bug fixes, and new features take a long time."
"Improvements are needed in the tool's performance."
"They could support machine learning algorithms for the product."
"Improvements might relate to the integration of the visual aspect of the product. There is a scope for improvement in the governance of the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product’s pricing will not be suitable for setting up a small solution."
"The solution's pricing is specific to your requirements."
"If you are using SAP, then you will have to take an SAP Connector license. The license across the tool is paying for the people who are using it as an admin or as a normal user. They can work out those costs in a manner that can help. This can also be a point of improvement where they can work out the costing, and the developers have a specific licensing cost. The normal users, who are going to do probably data entry or just going to view the dashboard, can have a separate license cost."
"Jedox was a bit cheaper compared to Calumo."
"We paid a one-time fee, which included product purchase, licensing, and first-time implementation. We are paying for the maintenance regularly."
"Excellent value for money."
"To get a full license, which gives you access to most of the different Hyperion programs, it costs $2000 to $2500 a month."
"Compared with MSBA, it is quite reasonable."
"The solution is affordable."
"As Oracle's pricing is on the higher end, most businesses prefer to have their own private cloud."
"The licenses cost approximately $1,000."
"We pay for licensing yearly."
"The licensing cost for the on-premises version of the solution is too high."
"Oracle Hyperion is not an inexpensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Performance Management solutions are best for your needs.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
University
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Oracle Hyperion?
We are going to re-implement the Oracle Hyperion system due to changes in our chart of account process and some other factors. We were analyzing whether to move to a cloud system, EPM Cloud. We hav...
What is your primary use case for Oracle Hyperion?
We are using Oracle Financials and Oracle Hyperion. Oracle Hyperion is used for budget and MIS reporting, while Financials is used for financial accounting, payables, receivables, and general ledge...
What advice do you have for others considering Oracle Hyperion?
We are using a centralized data repository with all system's data in data lakes. I am a functional user, not an IT person. We are satisfied with the progress, system, and features in Oracle Hyperio...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Jedox EPM
Hyperion
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BP, Fiat, Carrefour, Continental, Allianz, Bacardi, McDonald’s, Netafim, Swiss Post, Telstra, Suzuki, Vodafone, University of Western Australia, Unilever
ITNL, Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd., Zaklady Farmaceutyczne Polpharma S.A., Daelim Industrial Co. Ltd., Barco N.V., SITA, McGregor Fashion Group B.V., PCCW Ltd.
Find out what your peers are saying about Jedox vs. Oracle Hyperion and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.