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

MANTA Flow vs Microsoft Purview Data Governance comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 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

MANTA Flow
Ranking in Data Governance
37th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Purview Data Gove...
Ranking in Data Governance
1st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of MANTA Flow is 0.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Data Governance is 9.5%, down from 21.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Governance Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Purview Data Governance9.5%
MANTA Flow0.8%
Other89.7%
Data Governance
 

Featured Reviews

LeandroSodré - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Governance Analyst at Data Meaning, Inc.
Very Powerful, with cloud based scalability, and highly efficient for both business and technical teams
I had some difficulties, trying to use the direct link which is metadata through files that you can upload to MANTA Flow and you can just say from there where that data is going. But we just figured out that sometimes, depending on the level of the granularity that if you want to link the object, you can not. For example, if you want to link the objects just by schema, sometimes it does not work. So you need to scroll down and link each table. Sometimes the table level does not work, and you need to go deeper and go to link column to column. We figured out that this was a bug in MANTA Flow, and we talked to them and I think they were fixing it. But in our case, we just realized that if we could link the objects at the lowest level possible, it would work. I was trying to develop, right now, some kind of automation to compare the listed revision that I have in MANTA Flow with some other revision. And I would like to do it in an automatic way. I would like to have some kind of API where I could call this object and the revision that I want and the same object and another revision that I wanted to compare with. And I could not see it as some API in MANTA Flow, and we have this feature on the user interface. I think it would be very powerful because if you want to automate just warn the data owners the structures were updated by looking at the object level, and send an email to these owners to see if that change makes sense.
AS
Tech lead at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Automated data discovery has streamlined management while configuration remains complex
Compared to Big-ID, Microsoft Purview Data Governance looks complicated to me. I do not feel it has a good user-level UI. The interface feels a little complicated compared to Big-ID. I did not appreciate the configuration part. It felt complex, whereas when I went for a Big-ID demo, the interface looked better and was easier to understand for any user.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support works well, they resolve issues."
"I believe it is very powerful. And for technicians, you can see the impact analysis, you can compare versions. So you can see some revisions against some of the oldest ones. You can compare and see which pipelines were updated between them. I think it is very helpful to both sides, the technical and business teams."
"The solution is stable. We have not found any fatal errors yet."
"Microsoft Purview offers data protection across a multi-cloud and multi-platform environment."
"The integration ecosystem with Microsoft Purview is the most valuable aspect."
"The best part is that I can create classifications per my requirements. I use it to classify multiple platforms like AWS, GCP, Azure, and different file sharing systems."
"The user interface is highly intuitive and user-friendly."
"I really like the entire system for auto-labeling content. It's a very refined system. I use the Keyword Query Language to define refined string-based metadata, and then I can really go deep into the specific data with the specific properties labeled in such and such a way."
"The reporting is excellent. Limiting what people can see is also valuable, especially when tagging documents."
"The data classification part of the solution is excellent, especially as it gives us an insight into our sensitive data within Microsoft 365."
"It is critical that Purview delivers data protection across multi-cloud and multi-platform environments. That is the number one reason that people are adopting hybrid and best-of-the-breed approaches. Especially in banking, it is critical because people want to protect, govern, and secure their data. This is one of the first conversations that happens with security and the architecture group on the client side."
 

Cons

"I would like to have some kind of API where I could call this object and the revision that I want and the same object and another revision that I wanted to compare with. And I could not see it as some API in MANTA Flow, and we have this feature on the user interface."
"One area of improvement for MANTA Flow is to add as many new data sources as possible. We have found that maybe they can support 100, but not 101, unfortunately."
"One area of improvement for MANTA Flow is to add as many new data sources as possible. We have found that maybe they can support 100, but not 101, unfortunately."
"Although you can explore the data, that creates a great interest in data lineage or the data flow. How does it go from a source to a platform to a Power BI report, for example? It is possible, to some extent, to see that with Purview, but the lineage feature requires some manual work on the development side or more work from Microsoft to improve on it."
"Compared to Big-ID, Microsoft Purview Data Governance looks complicated to me. I do not feel it has a good user-level UI."
"The features in the actual data governance could be improved, and I think there is room for improvement in the product."
"Blueprints and landing zones like we have in Azure would be great to see in Purview. The solution could offer a baseline or blueprint of recommended settings for compliance regulations such as GDPR and ISO, which could be applied with a simple switch in the options."
"Purview's data connector platform for non-Microsoft data sources is good, but there is some functionality that hasn't been developed yet. There are some servers that it can't connect to yet, because they're still in a trial process."
"Compared to Big-ID, Microsoft Purview Data Governance looks complicated to me. I do not feel it has a good user-level UI."
"There are some limitations with regard to the lineage of data from different parts of the system."
"I lose a little bit of that control when we're talking about third-party connectors. Compliance-wise, I would like to see more ability to audit from a user perspective, where I could extrapolate what the user was thinking or trying to do."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As a service company, we don't care about the price because the customer is paying, but the customers consider MANTA to be reasonable."
"The price is reasonable because most of our clients already have an E3 license, which makes implementation easy."
"The price is a little bit high, but it's worth the money because it has a lot of features."
"The solution is extremely affordable for the K-12 space."
"Microsoft Purview is a subscription-based service, so we need either an E3 or E5 license to use it."
"The categorization within the licensing could be improved. There are a lot of solutions within Microsoft Purview. If the licensing could be a bit clearer and the solutions could be better categorized according to function and across multiple environments, that would be excellent. The licensing is very confusing."
"It's not cheap. I'm not exactly sure how much our license costs, but it is very expensive."
"Microsoft Purview is priced in the middle. It isn't the cheapest, but it isn't the most expensive. It's affordable compared to other public cloud services."
"Purview is included in our Microsoft E5 licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
886,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Insurance Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Purview?
Microsoft Purview Data Governance is quite affordable compared to other market solutions, which have high initial costs. It allows for a cost-effective start with negligible initial cost. However, ...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Purview?
The features in the actual data governance could be improved, and I think there is room for improvement in the product. We haven't used role-based access control in a complex way; it's somehow embe...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Azure Purview?
We are currently working with Microsoft Purview Data Governance and other Microsoft products. We are using Microsoft Purview Data Governance.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Purview, MS Azure Purview
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about MANTA Flow vs. Microsoft Purview Data Governance and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
886,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.