We performed a comparison between LeanIX and QualiWare X 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 most valuable features are the clean user interface and the fact sheet feature in Application Portfolio Management. The tool integrates well with ServiceNow, which is the usual CMDB platform."
"Interfaces well with downstream systems of data."
"I like the tool’s integration and maps."
"Ease of use is the most valuable feature. From an enterprise architecture perspective, it's not too cumbersome with too many functionalities, yet it has a lot of attributes for the content it covers."
"One of the product's most valuable features is its ability to configure hardware devices."
"We've been able to develop some nice looking reports, and the dashboard's capability to map is very easy compared to Enterprise Architect."
"The most valuable features are that it's user-friendly and the user experience. It's easy to map the fact sheets."
"The most valuable feature would be application portfolio management, which is where they came from, but over time, they have got artificial intelligence. They built up a very good repository. If I identify a system by name, from historical information, oftentimes, they can tell me that this is deployed with this number of CPUs and they can give me a really good profile of the application for me to put it into a change management database with very little effort."
"I like the solution's traceability."
"The solution’s API integration needs to improve. I would like to see a digital screen watch feature also in the solution."
"The solution needs to incorporate a data patch tool that moves within and irons data."
"LeanIX has limited in-build diagramming capabilities, requiring the purchase of another tool. That is the main drawback of LeanIX because they don't have a built-in add-on product for diagramming."
"The solution uses Gartner's time-based framework for application rationalization. One more thing that you can consider is having some add-on frameworks for the same, not just Gartner."
"Another area for improvement is that when you're starting to look into more advanced information, using the solution's APIs and its customizations, documentation for that specific aspect is not very good. There is not too much support built into the offering for that aspect, for a developer."
"The initial setup has room for improvement."
"I find LeanIX's pricing expensive for the functionality it offers. However, with the acquisition by SAP, the pricing might become more affordable due to scale and tiered application pricing. Currently, it offers different tiers for the first 400 applications: 400 to 600 and 600 to 1,000, making it expensive from a pricing standpoint."
"It's hard to predict the pricing of the system."
"The solution is not easy and intuitive to use. I would also like the software to have a reference metamodel that can guide the modeling."
LeanIX is ranked 1st in Enterprise Architecture Management with 18 reviews while QualiWare X is ranked 23rd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 3 reviews. LeanIX is rated 8.6, while QualiWare X is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of LeanIX writes "Streamlines the process of identifying apps nearing end-of-life or requiring retirement and facilitates informed decisions about app retention". On the other hand, the top reviewer of QualiWare X writes "Works as a reference for architecture but not very intuitive ". LeanIX is most compared with ServiceNow, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, MEGA HOPEX, ADOIT and iServer, whereas QualiWare X is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and ARIS Cloud. See our LeanIX vs. QualiWare X 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.