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

OpenText ProVision vs Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect 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

OpenText ProVision
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
28th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (46th)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Ar...
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of OpenText ProVision is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is 13.9%, down from 18.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1944672 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration
I primarily use OpenText ProVision to create our end-to-end process repository and library for different parts of the organization, capturing the collaboration process to get the right inputs OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and…
Milan Sterba - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient documentation generation through organized model structure with a good price-performance ratio
Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward. Although it's a powerful product with plenty of features, it's not easy for even experienced users to find their way without guidance. This is not the most user-friendly solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"Its ease of use and the breadth of the toolkit are most valuable. It has an incredible repository of artifacts to work with, and they're all cross-referenced. It works with a whole bunch of different standards. It works with BPMN, which is Business Process Modeling Notation, and it also works with something called TOGAF, which is the Open Group Architecture Foundation. There are different layers when you're dealing with architecture. There is the user interface, application, data, data servers, and all that kind of stuff. You have the infrastructure, hardware, and software layers, and then you have the application and business capability layers. You can model a business process and decompose it into all of the applications, data, and hardware to support it."
"The profiles allow me to customize the tool to the corporate environment instead of the other way around saving huge amounts of time and energy on trying to turn dozens of individuals into TOGAF, ArchiMate or Zachman experts, or even Sparx EA experts."
"Ability to keep inventory of reusable blocks, and use in different diagrams with views of various templates."
"The best thing about the tool is that its database is open."
"We have found the stability to be very reliable."
"We can easily use it with our new customers."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect supports multiple modeling languages like ArchiMate for database design, software lifecycle visualization, and team management."
 

Cons

"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"No way to implement data integrity and referential integrity constraints."
"The dashboard and connectivity could be improved."
"This solution is quite complex to use. It would be nice if the learning curve wasn't so steep."
"From a practical point of view, we need speed and reliability for creating a model and doing some really meaningful tasks such as application landscape, refactoring, etc. These are two primary criteria. Sometimes, when you import something, it creates the object duplicates, or it allows you to do something that you're not supposed to do. For example, validation is missing. This could be frustrating because when you work at a high speed, you need to come back and start fixing things that the tool allowed you to go with, which is not quite good. So, there should probably be some internal mechanisms to advise you about what you're doing and what is probably not the best idea."
"One room for improvement in Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is that it's not very friendly. Another room for improvement in the tool is that it doesn't enable you to import the metadata from a database very easily, so reverse engineering of a database was very difficult. Its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement."
"Its usability needs to be improved. For non-technical users, it is a little difficult to understand how Enterprise Architect works. Users who are not engineers find it difficult to understand how this tool works. This is something they need to work on. They can develop a BPM model to simulate processes."
"Sparx can be a bit slow. If you are trying to design software architecture, sometimes we run into issues and need to refresh."
"The product could be improved in terms of its ease of use and documentation. While it offers a lot of functionality, it can be difficult to grasp how to utilize these features effectively."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Pricing and licensing are suitable even for small companies."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"It’s the best deal in town, by far."
"There is no license required for this solution."
"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
"There is a license for this solution. When comparing this solution to others it is priced well."
"We have an annual license, and it's very affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Energy/Utilities Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Educational Organization
18%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
The stability has been good and satisfactory. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
One of the reasons many public sector institutions in the Czech Republic use it is that it provides a very good price-performance ratio. While it might be cumbersome to learn, it still delivers exc...
What needs improvement with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward. Although it's a powerful product with plenty of features, it's not ...
 

Also Known As

Metastorm ProVision
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Delta Technology, Export Development Canada, Rompetrol, Salt River Project, AMEC, U.S. Air Force, HP Consulting & Integration
OmniLink
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ProVision vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.