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

SAP Signavio Process Manager 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

SAP Signavio Process Manager
Ranking in Business Process Design
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (7th)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Ar...
Ranking in Business Process Design
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of SAP Signavio Process Manager is 8.2%, down from 8.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is 7.4%, down from 11.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SAP Signavio Process Manager8.2%
Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect7.4%
Other84.4%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

Eury Reyes P - PeerSpot reviewer
Analista sr. de procesos de transformación digital at a consumer goods company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Reveals real bottlenecks, but pricing and usability need work still require improvement.
SAP Signavio Process Manager could be improved in several areas to make it more competitive and accessible. From my experience, the strongest opportunity lies in enhancing its process mining capabilities. While Signavio offers solid functionality, other tools like Celonis provide deeper insights and more seamless integrations, especially when working with large datasets or complex execution paths. Strengthening the integration layer and expanding native process mining features would significantly elevate the platform. Another area for improvement is pricing. The solution tends to be positioned at a premium level, which can limit adoption compared to other tools that offer similar or stronger capabilities at a more accessible cost. A more flexible or tiered pricing model would make the product more appealing to a broader range of organizations. Regarding usability, while the platform is powerful, it can feel advanced for users who do not have a process engineering background. Improving the user interface and offering more intuitive guidance for non-technical stakeholders would help increase engagement and ease of use across teams. In terms of support, the setup experience is manageable, especially with technical assistance, but there is room for SAP to provide more consistent and accessible support to ensure a smoother learning curve for new users. Overall, enhancements in process mining depth, integration capabilities, pricing flexibility, and user-friendliness would make SAP Signavio Process Manager a more compelling and widely adoptable solution.
Milan Sterba - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Enterprise Architect at Deepview S.r.o.
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

"It is a stable solution."
"This product has helped us to work within standards for process planning."
"All in all, Signavio usability is excellent. Anyone can learn to use the tool quickly. This increases acceptance as employees are not facing a high learning curve. With the offered usability it is easy to model processes also live in workshops."
"This is one of the best solutions and it is easy to implement."
"The formatting features are quite good because you can create very complex models, but you can easily clean them up so that they look very nice."
"The features I find most valuable are ease of use and the Collaboration Hub."
"I like the collaboration and the real-time aspects of it."
"Version management is helpful because I like to try different versions and then decide which of them should be the main model."
"Scalability is not a problem. You can always increase the footprint of what the thing can do because it's so powerful."
"The stability has been good and satisfactory. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"Its traversability is most valuable. I can use ArchiMate, and I can create a UML model. ArchiMate is for logical enterprise architecture, UML is for software engineering, and BPMN is for business processes. I can build it to have multiple models, and they are also traversable, which is not something that every tool allows. If there is a huge organization, you can segment it and have separate models for business technology or internal resource management system. You don't need to keep them in one model, and you can decide to segregate them."
"For the most part, we find that it is remarkable how inexpensive it is."
"We use it to develop and maintain the Enterprise Conceptual Model, migrated from erwin a couple of years ago."
"It's a stable and scalable solution. I like that it's similar to Rational Rose."
"It's a very practical solution. You don't need to do an advanced course to start using this tool."
"Simplified our task at maintaining architecture information and traceability with requirements."
 

Cons

"Its reporting feature could have customization options."
"I think the interface itself can improve a bit. I think the interface is still stuck about a decade in the past, if I may be so brutal about it. Some of the buttons are really small, so you can't even see them. I think it needs upgrading to the 21st century with apps and the way we use mobile phones."
"Signavio Process Manager needs to have an integrated document management system to better work with processes that rely heavily on documents and document flows."
"The performance metrics appearing in the collaboration hub needs to be improved."
"There is a lot of room for improvement. We've submitted a lot of OSS requests for special inputs we need, like glossary or dictionary entries in Quick Model. Currently, that's not functional."
"We sometimes experience downtime or a dropped connection, so I think that the stability can be improved for the SaaS solution."
"The free trial needs to have more options for end users, such as including Process Intelligence as a trial version."
"There is always room for improvement is the capability of integration with other solutions."
"There should be a MATLAB-specific toolbox added to the solution with better compatibility. The connections currently are good but in the future, it needs a huge improvement."
"It can be improved in the area of shared documentation. The idea is that the architecture tool can call back to an enterprise asset, pull that information, and link that as a sub-artifact."
"I would like the system to more "intellectually" build a scheme, place icons, and connect lines on the schemes."
"It would be great if we could decrease the use of different parts of the Toolbox."
"Sparx can be a bit slow. If you are trying to design software architecture, sometimes we run into issues and need to refresh."
"The stability and performance of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect could still be improved. Setup for it is also slightly complicated and could be improved."
"The elements of the modeling sets can have better customization and visual representation. It would be great to have a mobile version."
"I think the product is good. When I'm trying to do something specific for some part of project documentation, it's hard to get it figured out if you don't use it all the time. It's such a massive tool, it's hard to figure out how to dig in and get to the documentation where you have to be to get some idea of what to do. There are not a lot of examples that I'm aware of to be able to do that."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"Lower than the competition with highly flexible licensing plans."
"Comparatively, it is a bit costly when you look at similar tools with similar features."
"I think that the price of the licenses is between $2,000 USD and $3,000 USD per license per year, plus the hub usage. I cannot remember the exact cost, but it is affordable."
"My client purchased one editor license and the collaboration hub, which covers up to a hundred people."
"This solution provides really great value for the money."
"SAP is always more expensive. The per-user cost is hard to calculate and forecast for a big company."
"Although Signavio is a feature-rich solution, it is expensive for companies who haven’t reached a certain maturity level in their process management initiatives."
"The pricing for ultimate version is steeply high."
"The license I use is on-premise. We haven't gone to the cloud where we have to pay monthly or something like that. Sparx is cheaper than most similar tools."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"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."
"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
"It is very economical and low cost. You have to pay for a one-time license, and it is active forever."
"Pricing and licensing are suitable even for small companies."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise44
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business38
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise58
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Signavio Process Manager or Celonis?
SAP Signavio Process Manager is a very robust industrial-grade business process modeling tool. It is easy to use and does not require too much technological involvement. This solution has a collabo...
What do you like most about Signavio Process Manager?
The visual representation is extremely powerful and easy to use in process modeling and analysis. I can show it to someone who doesn't know business process mapping, and they still understand bec...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Signavio Process Manager?
The price of SAP Signavio Process Manager was quite high but could be afforded by an organization with a sensitive data scale.
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

Signavio Process Editor
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DHL, Coca Cola EP, Prudential, Zalando, T-Systems, Jabil, Endress+Hauser, Rakuten
OmniLink
Find out what your peers are saying about SAP Signavio Process Manager vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.