Alfabet FastLane vs LeanIX comparison

"The solution has provided us with a view of the truth in terms of our application portfolio."

"I like LeanIX's ease of use in general."

"I can develop a report and then do a presentation, or develop a report and some other diagrams and then put them all in one presentation, and from there, I can present things directly, so there is no need to move images."

"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 usability is very high. It almost looks like a Facebook for Enterprise architecture, it's pretty nice. It's HTML5 based. The repository is very easy. It has 10 different ways of sorting the objects you have in your architecture repository. Maintaining new data or to add data to your repository is very easy."

"The most valuable features include the reporting capabilities and the LeanIX Academy's educational resources."

"It offers neat visualization and referencing functionality while enabling the creation of landscape maps and showing the relationship between different applications."

"LeanIX has a great application information architecture."

"The solution has a very useful assessment tool that automatically populates from input data to produce a detailed analysis of customer's environments."

"The initial setup is challenging because it relies on information from different stakeholders."

"Report generation could be more detailed. There are some shortcomings when creating reports. We can't create tag-based reports or go beyond basic technical reports."

"LeanIX experiences a lot of server timeouts. Nearly every transaction needs to be done twice due to these issues."

"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."

"It's hard to predict the pricing of the system."

"It would be beneficial to have additional features and capabilities to enhance mapping between applications, especially across domains where the relationships may not be direct."

"The solution’s API integration needs to improve. I would like to see a digital screen watch feature also in the solution."

"The whole integration architecture view of interfaces/data exchange could be improved."

"I am with a third-party so am not privy to costs."

"It cost me $91,000 a year for 300 applications. For any enterprise, 300 applications are minimal, as many have well over 1,000 applications."

"I would rate the pricing a one out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."

"The pricing is very good. We definitely get good value for the money."

"The tool needs to include more flexible licensing options. We do not use the tool all the time. So pricing should be considered only when we use the tool."

"There is a sweet spot of where they need to be on pricing right now. They could go up a little bit in pricing, but it has to do with the cost savings, and it has to do with the practitioners using it. I use it where I get cost savings and I can justify it, but they probably have the ability to flex a 10% up channel on their sales on that. So, they could increase their settle price, not their offering price, when they sell. They can probably hold that up a little bit higher than it is because there are cost savings that we can drive from it."

"As the tool is cloud-based, its cost is more affordable."

"LeanIX uses application-based account licensing, where the cost is multiplied by the number of applications in the software implementation."

"The solution's pricing is based on a licensing model that is competitive and in line with other products."