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

JIRA Portfolio vs Planview Daptiv comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

JIRA Portfolio
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (4th)
Planview Daptiv
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Project Portfolio Management (13th)
 

Featured Reviews

Gus Mtz - PeerSpot reviewer
Subdirector of Support for Production at Servicios Electrónicos Globales -Oficial
Collaborative features improve task management and project tracking
All the business areas are comfortable with JIRA Portfolio. JIRA Portfolio has many features that we have not yet explored or utilized fully, but the power of JIRA Portfolio at this moment for the several areas in the business has been a very comfortable experience. The cloud accessibility and quick task creation capabilities make collaborating with the tool a great feature for working with my team. Users can assign tasks to one or two people who can collaborate and document their work. That feature is amazing in terms of collaboration. While the tool does not currently support meetings, if JIRA Portfolio incorporates meeting functionality in the future, it would greatly enhance the process, especially for tasks requiring teams from different areas.
reviewer2068344 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Operations at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Useful project management capabilities, beneficial dashboards, but project planning could improve
The areas that should be improved in Planview Daptiv are a subject that can be viewed differently depending on who you ask. I feel they should focus on excelling in one specific area rather than providing average capabilities in many areas. For example, their project planning software is satisfactory but not as advanced as Microsoft Projects. The same goes for the capacity planning tool and reporting capabilities, which can be improved upon by using custom Excel spreadsheets or by hiring a business analyst for additional support. In short, the biggest weakness of Daptiv is that it does not excel in any one area and only provides average performance. In a future release, it would be beneficial to have a undo button.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool helps us achieve more within the stipulated timeline and budget."
"All of the charts, including the Burndown chart, are very useful for us."
"Its stability is very reliable."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The stability of JIRA Portfolio is very good."
"Before JIRA, we used to organize our software with Bitbucket but now, with JIRA, it is more efficient to organize all the work in the timeline, make long-term plans for one or two months, know what our deadlines are, and write short summaries in the backlog."
"The solution includes good and fast notifications for other project team members."
"Jira Portfolio is useful for tracking time and hours. It's easy to manage, create tickets, and change the status of delivery reports. It's not complicated."
"Consequently, it is the single point of truth for both our project managers and our senior leadership."
"Daptiv templates give you a world of possibilities, no matter the PMI maturity level the company has."
"Reporting of IT capacity available for first time, time sheets available for first time."
"The timekeeping features are great and very helpful."
"Changepoint gives us a view of the project status and needs very clearly, which are things that we used to miss with MS Project and Excel."
"The timekeeping features are great and very helpful."
"The powerful collaboration is definitely the most valuable and the fact that you can adjust flexibility to almost any methodology, and the easy creation of complete new functionalities without programming code."
"I like the reporting engine, IBM Cognos, especially the analytics. That's a good tool. It's quite strong on the ideation and capacity-planning side, which is a huge plus."
 

Cons

"Learning JIRA is not so easy. There is a learning curve."
"It's hard for people to learn. It's got kind of a steep learning curve."
"It's got kind of a steep learning curve."
"Converting a task into an epic is very troublesome."
"Their interface is a little unique and I think that's partly because the core of the product has morphed into several sub-products, but the underlying architecture has stayed the same on all of them in that it was originally a help desk ticketing system. It's a very tech-focused product and that's fair given its origins, but if they really want to expand their community of users, then they're going to have to move beyond that a little bit and polish it up."
"JIRA Portfolio could improve new implementation because if I want integration for the complete wide frame tools it cannot provide any wide frame tools."
"The tool is very open, which leads to a lot of error, confusion, and end problems."
"Another thing could be to have an easy way to manage the Portfolio and have more ways to share and to show graphics and reports"
"This solution needs more standard connectors to other solutions i.e. to Infor ERP, Confluence, ..."
"I find the solution has an excessive amount of features. Many aren't even kept current. Some aren't useful at all. There's an overall lack of coherence within the solution. It can make the execution difficult. Many features can easily be eliminated and it would help streamline the solution. They should get rid of 80% of the features and then really focus on the leftover 20% to make it a really great product."
"Accessing some functions is a bit obscure and requires some knowledge of how the product works, but the upgrade from v2012 to 2014 improved that situation and I expect the upcoming upgrade to 2017 to further streamline operations."
"The previous solution that we were using was Projector PSA; it was overall a superior product."
"I find the solution has an excessive amount of features. Many aren't even kept current."
"I would say there is too much work that has to go into the configuration up front and for the first 6 months to 1 year after, which costs time, money, and resources, and it is not a very advanced tool and seems interface-wise to be behind the times."
"It would also be nice to see some improvements on the IBM Cognos Analytics. There's still work to be done on the analytics side of things, like your condition formality."
"The areas that should be improved in Planview Daptiv are a subject that can be viewed differently depending on who you ask. I feel they should focus on excelling in one specific area rather than providing average capabilities in many areas. For example, their project planning software is satisfactory but not as advanced as Microsoft Projects. The same goes for the capacity planning tool and reporting capabilities, which can be improved upon by using custom Excel spreadsheets or by hiring a business analyst for additional support. In short, the biggest weakness of Daptiv is that it does not excel in any one area and only provides average performance."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I do not believe that the product provides value for money since I feel that it is quite expensive."
"We only have nine people using it so we have a standard cost of $150 dollar per year. There are only additional costs if you exceed the limit of users, then you start paying by user. The cost is significantly higher."
"Given the solution’s significant functionality, benefits, and value, you get more than you pay for."
"Portfolio is very expensive, costing on average $2000-3000 per user per month."
"The pricing of the solution is expensive."
"We have a license to use JIRA Portfolio, we are not using the free version."
"This solution has a comparable pricing in comparison to other similar products on the market."
"Portfolio is well-priced - a license for ten users costs $100 or $150 a month."
"The licensing is pretty complex. Each kind of user is a different price. It's approximately $300 per year. They charge additional fees for technical support and other additional services."
"It's a yearly license, but it's not an open license. It's based on users and their roles. So your administrator is priced differently from your timesheet user."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Project Portfolio Management solutions are best for your needs.
891,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
10%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Performing Arts
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise32
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about JIRA Portfolio?
The solution's tracking capabilities helped ensure we had full visibility into planned work and scheduled work.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JIRA Portfolio?
I am part of the delivery team and am not exposed to the commercial information. However, from what I understand, JIRA is competitively priced. It is not considered expensive in the market.
What needs improvement with JIRA Portfolio?
The setup process for JIRA Portfolio is complex.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Portfolio for JIRA
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rosetta Stone, Sprint, UBS, Workday, Expedia, J.P. Morgan
AOS Studley, Austrian Airlines, bpost bank, Employees Provident Fund, Stena Metall, VitalityHealth, Precor
Find out what your peers are saying about JIRA Portfolio vs. Planview Daptiv and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
891,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.