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

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central vs SYSPRO 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

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Busi...
Ranking in ERP
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
Activity Based Costing Software (1st)
SYSPRO
Ranking in ERP
30th
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the ERP category, the mindshare of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is 6.3%, up from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SYSPRO is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ERP Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central6.3%
SYSPRO0.8%
Other92.9%
ERP
 

Featured Reviews

StefaanVandesompele - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides end-to-end accounting and finance module at reasonable pricing
365 Business Central integrates with Office 365 to streamline the invoice approval process. This allows businesses to manage and approve invoices efficiently within a unified system. Our organization plans to transition to the Dynamics 365 environment, where various functions will be centralized. We will consolidate everything into one system instead of maintaining multiple databases for each country with local data. Dynamics 365 is fully integrated, which should address many of our challenges when we migrate to this new environment. We look forward to seeing how it performs in practice. The project is progressing well overall, though integrating it with other tools and ensuring Dynamics 365 operates smoothly can be challenging. Dynamics 365 is user-friendly and effective. However, a deeper understanding of its technical capabilities and architecture might be necessary to optimize its use fully. The software landscape is evolving, and achieving the best reporting and functionality with just a click can be complex. A clear vision of what you want to achieve with Dynamics 365 is essential. Proper preparation and configuration are crucial to achieving the desired outcomes. This principle applies not only to Dynamics 365 but to all software packages. Understanding the system's flexibility and adaptability based on your specific business needs is key to its successful implementation. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
reviewer1413297 - PeerSpot reviewer
A great choice for straight manufacturing, but not suitable for complex manufacturing models
SYSPRO at the moment is lacking on the project side. There's a module called Projects and Contracts, and it's a poorly designed module. One of my clients is a project-based organization, and they're finding it extremely difficult to manage their business using SYSPRO, to the point that they're looking at alternative solutions. The Projects and Contracts module is not a very useful tool. It does project accounting reasonably well, but in terms of putting in proper structures, like a work breakdown structure and so forth, it's actually quite poor. Their design or their architecture for the Projects module isn't good enough. They need to redesign it and redevelop it. They have made improvements. However, the problem is that if you're building on a bad foundation, then your building isn't going to be very strong. That's principally their problem. Any heavy equipment company would have a requirement to keep their equipment available for production. In that sense, SYSPRO has no maintenance management functionality. There's also no functionality for field services management. These two functionalities are critical for places like mines or for heavy equipment manufacturers who service the aftermarket and so forth. From a product perspective, this obviously isn't a good place to be because they are sort of taking themselves out of the market for quite a number of industries. They are constrained to manufacturing and distribution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution's integrations and interface are very good."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is its ease of use, data customization, and smooth integration."
"Microsoft Dynamics NAV is good for smaller-sized companies."
"Its most valuable feature is the user interface."
"Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is extremely stable as it does not rely on our in-house servers."
"It's quite reliable, and there's a good local provider who can adapt the solution for tax issues."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The solution has good dashboard functionalities and export functionalities."
"The Financial Accounting module, in general, is quite good. It is quite simple but powerful. Similarly, the Manufacturing functionality, including a multiple level bill of materials, is also quite useful."
 

Cons

"I think Microsoft should improve on the process of how the user decides on a business workflow. For example, there may be some kind of drag-and-drop interface that lets us decide for ourselves how to develop the business workflows that fit our purpose."
"The advanced warehouse functionalities are not available and should be improved. The purchase requisition process is also lacking, and more advanced functionalities for intercompany consolidations could be added."
"There is a book for Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central explaining how to use it. But it is not easy to use, and it is not easy to learn."
"Its task scheduling and manufacturing models need improvement."
"I work in Pakistan, and many people want desktop solutions. They don't want to work on the cloud. They want a strictly on-premises solution."
"For a big company like us with millions of transactions, the scalability isn't enough."
"The initial setup of the solution was quite complex and the troubleshooting involved with that needs to be improved."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to reverse or correct transactions more easily."
"SYSPRO at the moment is lacking on the project side. There's a module called Projects and Contracts, and it's a poorly designed module. One of my clients is a project-based organization, and they're finding it extremely difficult to manage their business using SYSPRO, to the point that they're looking at alternative solutions. The Projects and Contracts module is not a very useful tool. It does project accounting reasonably well, but in terms of putting in proper structures, like a work breakdown structure and so forth, it's actually quite poor. Their design or their architecture for the Projects module isn't good enough. They need to redesign it and redevelop it. They have made improvements. However, the problem is that if you're building on a bad foundation, then your building isn't going to be very strong. That's principally their problem. Any heavy equipment company would have a requirement to keep their equipment available for production. In that sense, SYSPRO has no maintenance management functionality. There's also no functionality for field services management. These two functionalities are critical for places like mines or for heavy equipment manufacturers who service the aftermarket and so forth. From a product perspective, this obviously isn't a good place to be because they are sort of taking themselves out of the market for quite a number of industries. They are constrained to manufacturing and distribution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its licensing is yearly. In addition to the licensing cost, there is the cost of hosting on Azure."
"The price of the solution could be reduced to improve their offering."
"The price of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is reasonable. We pay monthly for the use of the solution."
"The price of the solution is reasonable."
"The solution's license is costly compared to other CRM tools."
"NAV might be a little pricey for a small or medium-sized company, but all the solutions out there are."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
"The first time we tried to buy the newest version, it was expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ERP solutions are best for your needs.
870,623 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Retailer
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise19
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Microsoft Dynamics NAV?
The platform offers a robust and comprehensive cycle for supply chain and inventory management, with features like minimum and maximum settings, dynamic monitoring of inventory levels, and integrat...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Dynamics NAV?
I don't have specific information about the pricing of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central. However, it was very costly due to the numerous integrations we had.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Dynamics NAV?
When I started working with Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, I was new and didn't know what ERP was or its purpose, but I was eager to learn more each day. The system can become overwhelmed...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Dynamics NAV, MS Dynamics NAV
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Harris Farm Markets, Mister Spex GmbH, Bounce Foods, Eurofin Services SA, Medica Medizintechnik, Associated Gaskets, Onduline, Sitka Surfboard Corporation, World Animal Protection
Arctic Manufacturing
Find out what your peers are saying about SAP, Microsoft, Infor and others in ERP. Updated: October 2025.
870,623 professionals have used our research since 2012.