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

Magic xpa Application Platform vs Mendix comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 2025

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

Magic xpa Application Platform
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (8th), Application Infrastructure (14th)
Mendix
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (8th), Low-Code Development Platforms (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 3.8%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mendix is 22.8%, up from 21.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Mylsamy T. - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables us to develop more than 90 applications in-house, which are used across our organization
It's a bit difficult to work with purely web-based applications to get the data and display it. There have been a few times when the connection was disconnected between the server and your browser. The connectivity on browser-built applications needs to be improved. The mobile application development could be easier. They could include different external applications, like finger sensors. I'm not sure whether it's in version 3.8 or not.
Sameer Verma - PeerSpot reviewer
Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability
There is always a layer of custom code required. There is a misconception of low-code, or Mendix, or the industry in general. They are perceived as more of a dashboarding tool, and as a visualization platform only, rather than building a complete enterprise solution. That's more of an awareness marketing challenge they have, or the industry has. In general, AI needs to be better. The team and the company is running ahead with this a bit more. AI area is something which companies have started to pick up on, low-code wise, and they should invest in it more. I would like to see their data hub module become a little bit more mature. They need to expand their base as the concept is amazing. We just need to see more use cases and learn more capabilities there, and then definitely they need to fill in the AI piece of it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"The best feature of Magic is the development time. The time it takes to develop something is incredibly fast if you compare Magic with, for example, Java."
"Magic’s unique approach to development ensures that the programmer stays focused on the objective of the program (i.e. display all customers in California), instead of the repetitive tasks that surround it (i.e. connect to database, open customers table, create the query to retrieve records within the specified criteria, fetch the result of the query, connect it to a data grid, etc.)."
"Without the need to compile code, the time spent in the development cycle is greatly reduced, allowing the programmer to test modifications to a program immediately after they have been saved."
"Being able to make changes to existing programs to comply with last minute changes in requirements, and/or being able to fix, test, review, and deploy new code in a manner of hours instead of days, definitely gives us a huge advantage over our competitors and this is only possible thanks to Magic’s speed of programming."
"Magic is rapid, it's a tool which we use to develop, change and maintain our programs. xpa has a lot more features onboard and it gives us the opportunity to do such things so that we can easily adapt and maintain our programs. It gives certain benefits to stay with our customers and the market."
"What I found most valuable in the Magic xpa Application Platform is that it has a client-server and web browser technology that's perfect for company users."
"You can scale the solution."
"I find the fast development speed and low cost to be very valuable features of Mendix. It's a smart solution for busy developers when we need to apply new changes or fixes quickly. Mendix helps to save time and meet project deadlines faster."
"The most valuable features of the product are its ease of use and speed. My friend and I find it helpful as a team of just two developers."
"It is a brilliant solution."
"What I found most valuable in Mendix is that it's very much suitable for mobile apps such as native Android or IOS supported mobile apps. The multiple features of the platform are very, very attractive and very popular. Mendix has technical features such as microflows and nanoflows. You can also access data models in the platform. These are the features that are very, very strong in Mendix. I got my hands dirty on other low-code platforms, but I have not seen such strong features in them compared to the microflows, nanoflows, and data model access that are in Mendix, including creating and integration. The platform has out-of-the-box adapters or out-of-the-box-connectors that you can integrate with different interface applications such as SAP, Salesforce, Oracle EBS, etc."
"The solution is stable."
"It is stable."
"What I like best about Mendix is that it's leading the way for low-code, no-code platforms compared to other solutions in the market."
 

Cons

"It is missing basic charting tools for bar/pie/series charts. It is left to the developer to acquire and deploy charting tools or the customer to purchase a third-party reporting tool to produce charts."
"The Android environment is missing a number of functions for file/folder manipulation, sending receiving text messages (SMS) and the menuing options are limited. For now, it is left to the developer to write his/her own Java functions to include in the APK."
"Throughout my career, I've encountered difficulties when integrating new technologies with Magic xpa Application Platform. In particular, when attempting to incorporate features from other development languages into earlier versions of the solution called uniPaaS. I struggled to integrate .NET components due to the limited options available. This made the process more challenging and complicated. I find it challenging to create a more user-friendly experience for users who may be comparing the system to other systems they have used outside or within the company on different platforms."
"Magic has a tradition, when it adds new technologies/features to the Magic development tool, to provide either no documentation or documentation that does not provide an organized approach for bringing this new technology/feature to experienced Magic programmers."
"Support is very bad."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"In the next version of the Magic xpa Application Platform, I want tables or small programs where I can directly add expressions. I can do it on SQL, but it would make life much easier if that specification were added to the platform."
"The configuration of the xpa RIA mobile environment is complex and a discouragement to new developers. Also, Magic's documentation can be less than complete at times which leads to frustration for new developers. (I encourage new Magic developers to join the Magic Users Group)."
"The code refactoring tools could be better, especially for applications running for years. It's not bad, but it could be smoother. Also, writing new widgets can be trickier than it should be for some people, but not if you're familiar with Mendix."
"There's no direct tech support."
"One area for improvement is its integration capabilities. Creating a pluggable widget or integrating it with other systems is challenging. In terms of features, it would be great to see advancements such as AI services and the integration of third-party services. Additionally, connecting external devices to the application requires multiple steps. Improving this will make it easier for the developers."
"You need experienced programmers and developers to understand this solution."
"While the documentation is good, the development box could be better."
"I struggle with solutions like Mendix in terms of creating enterprise solutions."
"There is always a layer of custom code required."
"I would also like to see automatic adjustment to the Java Heap, whenever an application load becomes too much for the application. It could also use hot database replication."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is too costly."
"Magic is not the cheapest IDE out there. If you are considering Magic xpa, you should do a cost-benefit analysis to feel comfortable with your decision. The Magic sales staff is very helpful in providing pricing."
"The main problem with the Magic xpa Application Platform is pricing. You have to pay a lot of money for development, and you also have to pay a lot for the deployments and runtime, while in most competitors, you have to pay a lot for one of the two and not both."
"The licensing cost varies because nowadays Magic has tailor-made offerings for clients. I think the solution is worth the money."
"There are different licenses, we have the application and the online application. There are two different licenses for two different program sites for the Magic xpa Application Platform."
"My clients have to purchase additional licenses in order to use what I built. It's not a fair approach."
"The cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"It's not cheap. The licenses are not cheap. Not at all. They cost much money. There are other tools with free licenses but Magic asks for a lot of money."
"Initially, we started with a year for approximately $25,000, and if we need to expand the number of seats then we will increase it."
"The solution is a bit expensive compared to others"
"Mendix is not open source, but its license cost is cheap, particularly when compared to the Appian license. The license model would depend on how many users you have and how many applications you are creating. If you are creating a single app, you just need to have a single app license, so it's free. If you want a multiple app license to cover two thousand or three thousand users, for example, internal users or external users, then you need to pay for the license. There's also a license model for above three thousand or four thousand, or five thousand internal and external users."
"Pricing used to be complex, but Mendix has improved that quite a bit."
"Mendix licensing cost is based on the number of apps you have on the server. At the basic level, it is free of charge, so that seems reasonable, but once you go beyond that, and when it comes to the number of users on the app, that basic structure doesn't work, and the pricing tends to get a little bit steep."
"Mendix seems a bit expensive. But in terms of wanting to have less developers and higher velocity, the total cost of ownership is fine. It's not cheap, though."
"Licensing costs are similar to those for all other IT technology, but they vary by region."
"Its cost is higher than competitors. The cost mostly includes licensing. It is charged per user. The cost model could be better. When you have a big company, what does per user mean? If I have a company where I have 40,000 people who will go to access it but only 200 do, how do you license it and who do you pay for? If they hit it once, do you pay for it? The licensing is complex for a big company. It is easy for us to buy all we can eat, get an enterprise license agreement, and call it good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Insurance Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
University
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Mendix?
We also use Mendix Enterprise Integration for complex business logic. It's a low-code platform, so we run Mendix in the Mendix Cloud.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Mendix?
I would rate the pricing a six out of ten. The solution is a bit expensive compared to others, but in the long term, it is worth it. For instance, Microsoft Power Apps don't demand a huge investmen...
What needs improvement with Mendix?
All software applications have their hiccups, including the Mendix Studio Pro developers program. Though still improving, there is no specific example of what really needs to be improved. Some lear...
 

Also Known As

uniPaaS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ADD, Cape plc, Adecco, Kuno Kinzoku Industry Co., GE Capital, Dove Tree, CBS Outdoor, Paris-Nord Villepinte Exhibition Center, Allstate Life Insurance Company, Titan Software Systems
Genzyme, TNT, Yahoo, Capgemini, Roche, D&B, Aegon, kpn, AZL, Sky, Arch, Penn State Univeristy, BancABC
Find out what your peers are saying about Magic xpa Application Platform vs. Mendix and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.