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

SAP S/4HANA 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

SAP S/4HANA
Ranking in ERP
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
125
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SYSPRO
Ranking in ERP
33rd
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the ERP category, the mindshare of SAP S/4HANA is 6.3%, down from 13.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SYSPRO is 1.1%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ERP Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SAP S/4HANA6.3%
SYSPRO1.1%
Other92.6%
ERP
 

Featured Reviews

Effendy Mohamed - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Instrument and Control at PETRONAS
Empowered decision-making accelerates with enhanced analytics capabilities
In my opinion, areas of SAP S/4HANA that have room for improvement would be in AI and insights generation, which would be a good enhancement for the future. Currently, this analytics is still driven by some sort of structured reporting system. Although it is easier, you still need to do some configuration of it. With AI functionality, you could just prompt and request the information, and then the version would quickly be revealed to you.
reviewer1413297 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
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

"I would recommend SAP S4HANA because it is a known solution that is stable and widely used by customers, thus making it reliable."
"The most valuable feature is probably the full integration with the finance system."
"The product rating is ten out of ten."
"The latest version from SAP is highly valued."
"Overall, I would rate the product ten out of ten."
"The scalability is excellent, especially on cloud deployment models."
"It seamlessly integrates with all the SAP Business Suite products such as IoT, AI, Analytics and all other SaaS solutions. The product is very robust and comprehensive."
"The system is good and not slow."
"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

"A virtual machine could exist to make everything available on a single deployment."
"The difficulty level of the initial setup depends on the person's skills. If you know the basic knowledge of the database, then it will be easy, otherwise, it will be very difficult."
"The resource usage could be improved - it's memory-hungry, so mid-range servers struggle to run it."
"SAP S/4HANA is an expensive solution."
"Lacks ability to easily mass upload which has become a necessity for industry."
"It is expensive to implement SAP in companies, making it an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The procure-to-pay solution in the Contract Management angle could be better. If you look at it on Ariba, the Contract Management Life Cycle for Ariba is more robust. You can create documentation, SLAs, and NDAs. Apart from the procurement aspect of the contract, you have the legal side, but Ariba cannot do that. From what I've seen, the features of the procure-to-pay model in S/4HANA and their Contract Life Cycle Management side primarily focus on the procurement side. I believe it would be good if this solution could handle a part of the legal side. They will incorporate Extended Warehouse Management and Transportation Management into the S/4HANA cloud. Most big companies that use a solution like S/4HANA have a legal department within the organization. Suppose they can incorporate that to be in S/4HANA suites; I think it'll be good. It will be just like what we have with Transportation Management and Extended Warehouse Management. The user interface could be better. They have too much information on the interface, and our customers still keep complaining that it looks complex. Even though many things have changed, they still complain that the interface or the screen they see is a bit complex. It's only when they see the Fiori interface that their mind becomes a bit calm."
"SAP S/4HANA could improve by making the interface easier to use."
"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

"The problem with SAP is that it offers two licenses, namely runtime license and enterprise license. If you have a runtime license, then you are doomed since you can't take any data out from the tool."
"Though we are talking about a competitively priced model, the pricing could be more cost-effective."
"We're not sure yet. I think it was six figures a year, over 100,000. It has straight-up licensing fees."
"The price of this product is an issue for some customers."
"The price could be lower."
"I feel that the product is a bit expensive."
"Depending on the solution there can be a different way of doing the license. Most of the licenses are annual, but there are some models where it is that offer pay-as-you-go. Additionally, there are some solutions that offer monthly per user."
"I rate the pricing a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is too expensive. It is an expensive tool."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ERP solutions are best for your needs.
883,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business51
Midsize Enterprise26
Large Enterprise53
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Are there any advantages of SAP S4 HANA over SAP Business One (SAP B1) apart from the cost?
SaP Business One is a complete solution for business management. The software applications are broad, ranging from accounting to project management and human resources. It is very versatile and com...
What needs improvement with SAP S4HANA?
In my opinion, areas of SAP S/4HANA that have room for improvement would be in AI and insights generation, which would be a good enhancement for the future. Currently, this analytics is still drive...
What is your primary use case for SAP S4HANA?
My experience with SAP S_4HANA involves working on several projects helping customers prepare their transition from ECC to SAP S_4HANA. My role was to study the gap and technical feasibility by exe...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

SAP S4HANA
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nestle, O.C. Tanner, Sabre, New York Life Insurance Co., MEMEBOX, Siemens AG.
Arctic Manufacturing
Find out what your peers are saying about SAP, Oracle, Microsoft and others in ERP. Updated: January 2026.
883,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.