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

No Magic MagicDraw vs QPR ProcessDesigner 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

No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
QPR ProcessDesigner
Ranking in Business Process Design
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 3.2%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QPR ProcessDesigner is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

DiegoRangel - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced team communication and design exploration with integrated simulation tools
I was using No Magic MagicDraw to model operations, such as using different kinds of operations with ships or crafts and other systems No Magic MagicDraw facilitated great communication within the team and allowed for the exploration of different designs and architectures, which was beneficial…
it_user211722 - PeerSpot reviewer
FactView was easy to use and integrate.
Process simulation Performance monitoring Business intelligence I was a consultant mainly at Standard Bank, I worked for the supplier of the QPR Suite. It was used mainly for balanced scorecard to track organisation performance, but also for process mapping and monitoring as part of their Six…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of No Magic MagicDraw is the simulation capabilities and interface."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to quickly build multiple layers within the organizational and business process environments, as well as in the SysML product environments, and converting to files that can be accessed by clients who do not have a system and a teamwork server access."
"I like the traceability feature. Whoever is working with the product would be sure of the things that could be affected if they decided to affect one of the other companies. For example, let's say that an engineer starts a new project optimization problem by adjusting the thickness of metal sheets. However, the engineers only see a reduced number of affections, but when we use the requirement traceability, they can see the whole picture. That's the main aspect that we were promoting with this tool."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile."
"The initial setup was not straightforward."
"When you look at it, No Magic is an all-encompassing tool. You can use it for business architecture design. You can use it for deploying an ERP system across your enterprise. However, it was initially designed and developed for model-based systems engineering. That's the systems engineering required to either produce an IP system or product. It takes away the mounds of paper and puts it into a model. It enables you to generate significant savings by modeling that new product or that system before you ever start developing a prototype."
"​Processes become clearer, easier to understand, and easier to spot in development areas."
"It makes communication easier due to transparency on processes."
 

Cons

"For the next releases, I would like to have them import requirements from other sources. They could make it very easy to do that because there are a lot requirements management tools like DOORS, D-O-O-R-S, Dynamic Object Oriented Management. A lot of folks use DOORS to create a requirement. For those requirements you allocate them to a component in the architecture and a verification method for that requirement. It would be good if we could import those into MagicDraw as components so you don't have to manually do these things."
"The technical support is not very good."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect. MagicDraw is stuck at C++03 standards, whereas most C++ programs today want to use the latest definition of the C++ standards. We were at C++11, and we wanted to do code engineering with C++11 or 17, but they didn't support it. That pushed us into a different tool, which is Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"There are some technical features that you have to study and do research on to be able to understand."
"When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy live business process models and capture real-time data (without the need for another product tool) so you don't have to be dependent on other products for this functionality."
"There could be a trial version for students."
"There is definitely a need to produce models in XML. There is already something available, but it seems that transferring between the different modelling tools is difficult."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
"The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
20%
Government
15%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about No Magic MagicDraw?
There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for No Magic MagicDraw?
Maybe the price is a little bit high for a small company to acquire this tool. However, they offer trial versions and trial licenses for members of INCOSE.
What needs improvement with No Magic MagicDraw?
I don't think there are areas that need improvement.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

MagicDraw
ProcessGuide, QPR Software ProcessGuide
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
ALPLA
Find out what your peers are saying about No Magic MagicDraw vs. QPR ProcessDesigner and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.