We performed a comparison between MEGA HOPEX and Planview Portfolios based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup was straightforward. With configuration, customizing or prepping the data and deployment, it took about one year to set up. We only needed two people to deploy and maintain the solution: one business architect and someone who specializes in customization and operations."
"I find the IT portfolio management very valuable and helpful."
"The most valuable parts of this solution are the richness of its features and its easy interface."
"It's excellent for supporting decision-making."
"The most valuable feature is the completeness of HOPEX's meta-model. It's a strong meta-model that's rigid but comprehensive. It's a logical fit for our understanding of how we want things modeled in our database."
"The most valuable feature for this solution is the automatic updating and propagation of changes across the system."
"We have many use cases for this solution but the feature I have found most valuable is the IT Portfolio Management module."
"The most valuable feature of MEGA HOPEX is the publication method for static websites. You can generate the whole database into a static website. Additionally, in the new tabular entry, you don't have to put objects or links, you can go and fill a tab and the MEGA HOPEX will generate an object for you in a simple way."
"The most valuable features are scheduling, resource management, and, from a project perspective, the functions like issues that change orders. They are valuable because, from a project management perspective, we use the workflows that we build for project management and do active risk management and issue management for the projects that we want for our agencies."
"With the lifecycles, it helps us step through our processes easier. We'll take a process and create it in Visio, then we'll go and implemented in Planview. Anytime that we have to do a new process, this is what we use. We just step it through the lifecycles and the configure screens are very easy to use. The fields that you need are easy to use."
"A lot of of the value is around the project metrics so far but as I get more plugged into the strategic management, it's strategic planning and programs and then tying that into outcomes. I work with executive leadership and that's really what they're looking for, to say, "Okay, what outcomes do we want to achieve and how are we going to get there, plan that out, sequence that out, and then get the work to do that? And then track the work back to where we're headed with our outcomes.""
"The most valuable features are the resource management, the time sheet entry and usage, and the financial planning. With our projects, we primarily focus on resource assignments, as far as determining the actual forecast and actuals of our projects. A lot of it is based off of the resources utilized on those projects. The time based helps us capture the actuals. The amount of time people are spending on working on their project tasks. Because they've built this into the schedule, so we can build the forecast. With financial planning, we're able to look back on what our variance is and if there is anything between the scheduled forecasted hours, dollars against the actual hours, and the costs that they utilize."
"The most valuable features are the control and visibility that you have for portfolio management in terms of projects and capacity planning for resources along with strategies and outcomes, etc. It's so easy to access information for sharing analytics and reporting."
"We do a lot of big projects which are pretty expensive to structure the product development around and see the progress. Every time we start a project, we have to expense the spends for certain amounts. We need some baselines, like predictive versus actual."
"It gives us flexibility in configuring assignments. We can do both Agile Teams and non-Agile Teams. This flexibility affects our ability to meet our company's particular needs by allowing us to work in a hybrid model, some Agile Teams, and some non-Agile Teams."
"We're still in an early stage. Things will change as we use it more. I did program reports that are important and that will provide us with value."
"It takes a long time to learn how to use HOPEX. It's hard to work with it because the user interface is bad. For example, if you want to build a complex system diagram, you need a lot of knowledge to do this correctly and make it readable. In MEGA, you need to create a report and it takes a long time to publish it. The publishing is offline. With RDoC, everything is online."
"It would be great if this solution could integrate with other tools such as ITSM (ServiceNow) or CMDB."
"The product must improve integration with other tools."
"MEGA HOPEX's initial setup could be easier. The newer version is better but they still need to improve the process. The deployment took approximately four to eight hours."
"It has a data domain where we load our data objects onto the tool but doesn't provide data governance capabilities such as cleansing or validating data."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"We have a very close relationship with MEGA representatives in Mexico, and we ask them why they don't offer impact analysis. For example, we have a server in the center and provide the client a view of what's in the peripheral area, like one cluster, application, process area, and services. We want to offer our clients that level of visibility with HOPEX."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"The administrative tabs are very confusing, especially in terms of configuring screens and users. It's not very intuitive versus many other applications that I have worked in the past. I have to go to separate sections than I think I have to in order to get to the place that I need to adjust something."
"The solution needs to be better at accepting new ideas for upcoming releases."
"Configuring the UI in the content management system is too elaborate and too time-consuming."
"The out-of-the-box reports, as far as I can tell, are weak. We've had to build a lot of reports using Power BI, which we connected to it."
"While Planview Management provides robust reporting and analytics capabilities, further enhancements could include more advanced data visualization options, predictive analytics features, and customizable dashboards to provide deeper insights into project performance and trends."
"The biggest room for improvement are the scripted dialogues. The scripted dialogues are a logic that you set up to force a certain workflow or process to happen. It's very old in respect that there are no clauses that you can apply to that logic. That definitely can use a lot of room for improvement."
"The solution out-of-the-box that we established was insufficient. We had to purchase and set up OData. I don't believe that it's a great solution out-of-the-box but eventually you can get there."
"Sometimes within the application, when you pull a report, it takes awhile performance-wise for the reports to pull up."
MEGA HOPEX is ranked 4th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 37 reviews while Planview Portfolios is ranked 12th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 63 reviews. MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8, while Planview Portfolios is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Interactive with good functionality and helps with productivity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Planview Portfolios writes "Helps prioritize projects, share the big picture with management, and has a great planning capacity". MEGA HOPEX is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio and Avolution ABACUS, whereas Planview Portfolios is most compared with Broadcom Clarity , Planview PPM Pro, LeanIX, Planview ProjectPlace and SAP Portfolio and Project Management. See our MEGA HOPEX vs. Planview Portfolios report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.