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

BiZZdesign HoriZZon vs No Magic MagicDraw 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

BiZZdesign HoriZZon
Ranking in Business Process Design
10th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (6th)
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of BiZZdesign HoriZZon is 2.7%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.7%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BiZZdesign HoriZZon2.7%
No Magic MagicDraw2.7%
Other94.6%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

Maamoun Hasuneh - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Enterprise Architect at EVC
Architecture repository has strengthened data‑driven decisions and supported risk‑aware planning
BiZZdesign HoriZZon needs to publish its integration scenarios and integration points with other digital transformation tools such as IT service management, risk management, asset management, customer service, and ERP. The company should first build the scenario and define its integration points in business and technology to make customers more confident about having a complete solution. Currently, there is a challenge with the company to offer transparent and documented integration. They offer five integration points at a fixed price, but other things come at additional costs. However, specific information about what those additional items are, what the scenarios entail, what the schemas are, what the workflows include, and what the application integration involves is not provided. The learning portal does not include integration documentation at a high level or in detail. The portal does have comprehensive resources explaining how to make their website, how to create dashboards, and how to publish EA content, which are clear. The high-end tool on the laptop is also explained in detail, covering elements, relations, and everything as standard.
reviewer2080611 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Ease of use and real-time collaboration empower effective teamwork and streamlined development
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works only with its IBM counterparts. SPARX Enterprise Architecture is very easy to use, but it's limited. It gives you an idea of how your model is developing, so this feature helps maintain integrity or correctness of system models. It's really a good feature to have. You've got to have the simulation toolkit installed to be able to do that, and that works really well. The MagicDraw or CAMEO system is good on its own, but it should be integrated and should come out of the box with the simulation toolkit because there are some things you can't do without it, making it very difficult to have to look for another license to be able to do that. I would prefer that it come with the simulation toolkit.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"This is one of the best tools, especially because of its collaborative nature. Anyone using it can access previous projects and related data. It's definitely a strong collaborative tool."
"I like the flexibility of the modeling part for standards like ArchiMate and, at the same time, BPMN. It allows us to connect elements from different areas and to have a single repository and a single source of truth. It gives us one place to do analysis throughout the organization."
"The most valuable features are the application, portfolio, data, architectures, and modeling things."
"The enterprise studio where the modelling happens is valuable."
"t's a good tool. My colleagues that are making use of it for application, business processes, or data modeling, are very satisfied with it. They find it easy to use. The graphical representation is simple but therefore efficient, so I know that they are planning a very good commencement on the use of these tools."
"It is very easy to use. I can just click on an application component and find out if we are using this particular component. This provides us flexibility."
"The tool's most valuable feature is that its collaboration part is very good."
"The most valuable features of BiZZdesign HoriZZon, from my experience, include its out-of-the-box connectors, such as integration with ServiceNow, Excel, and SQL databases, making data repository management more efficient."
"It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile."
"The most valuable features with No Magic MagicDraw are its ease of use; you can put this in front of a 12-year-old and they would know what to do right away."
"No Magic has the tools and capability to model a complete enterprise and all product lines."
"When you look at it, No Magic is an all-encompassing tool. You can use it for business architecture design. You can use it for deploying an ERP system across your enterprise. However, it was initially designed and developed for model-based systems engineering. That's the systems engineering required to either produce an IP system or product. It takes away the mounds of paper and puts it into a model. It enables you to generate significant savings by modeling that new product or that system before you ever start developing a prototype."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of No Magic MagicDraw is the simulation capabilities and interface."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
 

Cons

"It lacks capabilities with regard to infrastructure modeling."
"The repository of duplicate objects is bad."
"I have seen table charts where, if the chart is a little too big, it does not fit in HoriZZon and it is not at all visible... There have been several times where we could not publish a chart properly and we had to break the chart into small tables and create multiple artifacts, creating a complete mess. This should be seriously taken up by BiZZdesign because there is a lot of scope for improvement in terms of usability. It's not at all good, unfortunately."
"We tested it, and we had support from BiZZdesign, including patches, but it just didn't do what we wanted."
"BiZZdesign HoriZZon's technical support has presented challenges, as extra fees are required and the process is not straightforward."
"In HoriZZon, there are different matrices. In some of the cases, there is an option to aggregate them, but in other cases, we have not done this, e.g., to see the proper costs. For example, if I have 10 different matrices, then I need to create an aggregate view out of those 10 matrices somewhere. That is where we have been struggling a bit. We have a counterpart from the HoriZZon product team with whom we have bi-weekly discussions. We have suggested to him that this can be improved."
"There's room for improvement. When I finished using it over a year ago, I discussed implementing C4 notation with BiZZdesign HoriZZon.They've likely done this now, but I haven't seen it. Setting up interactive views for stakeholders to score services was a bit difficult."
"The users of BiZZdesign should be able to enter their data or make modeling changes via HoriZZon."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect. MagicDraw is stuck at C++03 standards, whereas most C++ programs today want to use the latest definition of the C++ standards. We were at C++11, and we wanted to do code engineering with C++11 or 17, but they didn't support it. That pushed us into a different tool, which is Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"The licenses are expensive compared to similar tools. At the moment, the user is open to using MagicDraw if it's 15% more than other solutions. If it were to cost any more, they wouldn't use it."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"There could be a trial version for students."
"The technical support is not very good."
"The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"Some of No Magic MagicDraw's most valuable features were its integration with other simulation tools, such as MATLAB, the seasonal plugin, and the Rangel simulation toolkit."
"It would be better if the User Interface were updated. At the moment, it's a classic environment. It reminds me of the old Windows interface, for example, Windows 95. It would be better to make it more user-friendly. It would also be better if it could integrate with SAP solutions. It isn't easy to find experts in the field. It's hard to find people around the globe that have the necessary skills and expertise to manage this solution. For example, in our case, we needed someone with refrigeration knowledge that also knew how to use the tool, and that was a challenge. We also had issues relating to erasing. Sometimes, it kept it in the background and didn't erase it at all. We had to review the entire list to ensure that the item was deleted."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing model is slightly on the high side and could be more competitive for long-term partnerships."
"First and foremost within the scope of improvement for the solution would be the cost. It's very costly..."
"I haven't found any issues with the scalability and licensing parts that are access-related."
"In terms of this particular product usage, my clients currently only use per-user licenses."
"The price is reasonable."
"If one is very cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the product price as a seven out of ten."
"[The] Orbus... pricing model was based on every single functionality having a price. The pricing was comparable but if we wanted to scale, it would have ended up being a lot more expensive. BiZZdesign gave us one price with all of the functionality, and we could scale as much as we needed."
"We were customers and bought licenses from them. We used their remote instance initially but upgraded to the on-device version due to lag. For pricing, we paid about 2200 pounds a year per seat for the client installation at an educational rate. I'm not sure about commercial rates. I managed to get a free copy at BBC since it was for evaluation purposes."
"The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
"I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
5%
Manufacturing Company
24%
Government
11%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BiZZdesign HoriZZon?
This is one of the best tools, especially because of its collaborative nature. Anyone using it can access previous projects and related data. It's definitely a strong collaborative tool.
What needs improvement with BiZZdesign HoriZZon?
BiZZdesign HoriZZon needs to publish its integration scenarios and integration points with other digital transformation tools such as IT service management, risk management, asset management, custo...
What is your primary use case for BiZZdesign HoriZZon?
BiZZdesign HoriZZon is primarily used as a repository for Enterprise Architecture and is also utilized in broad portfolio management including project management and other applications, but the mai...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for No Magic MagicDraw?
Maybe the price is a little bit high for a small company to acquire this tool. However, they offer trial versions and trial licenses for members of INCOSE.
What needs improvement with No Magic MagicDraw?
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works...
What is your primary use case for No Magic MagicDraw?
I deal with DOD lifecycle acquisition sorts of things as some of the main use cases currently, and I expect to continue using it for more than 25 years.
 

Also Known As

HoriZZon
MagicDraw
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Shell, HSBC, Erasmus University, VIVAT Insurance
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
Find out what your peers are saying about BiZZdesign HoriZZon vs. No Magic MagicDraw and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.