No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CloverETL vs Workday Adaptive Planning comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 21, 2026

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

CloverETL
Ranking in Data Visualization
35th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (58th)
Workday Adaptive Planning
Ranking in Data Visualization
20th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Business Performance Management (10th), Financial Performance and Strategy Management (4th), Reporting (23rd), ESG Reporting Software (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Data Visualization category, the mindshare of CloverETL is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Workday Adaptive Planning is 1.9%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Visualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Workday Adaptive Planning1.9%
CloverETL0.9%
Other97.2%
Data Visualization
 

Featured Reviews

it_user856614 - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Programmer at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them, however we run out heap space even with a high allocation
Flexibility: We can bring in data from multiple sources, e.g., databases, text files, JSON, email, XML, etc. This has been very helpful Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility. Server features for scheduler: It is…
Andrew Rosenberg - PeerSpot reviewer
Adaptive Planning Manager at Alight
Adaptive scales well, simple to create new budget versions and models
For the organization I used to work at, it streamlined the process of creating budgets. It's very simple to create a new version and do some more modeling based on your need for planning things like headcount, other expenses, and revenue, everything is configurable within Workday. So that made it easy. Reporting was pretty easy to set up as well. It streamlined the amount of time it took to do the budget as well as kind of making it simple to implement a rolling forecast process. So, it really was more just a productivity increase and time shortening for the budgeting and forecasting process.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Key features include wealth of pre-defined components; all components are customizable; descriptive logging, especially for error messages."
"Server features for scheduler: It is very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them. The interface is easy to use."
"Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility."
"No dependence on native language and ease of use.​​"
"Familiar, intuitive GUI coming from a Java development background, in-depth, descriptive, and well-laid-out documentation, responsive support through forums directly from Clover staff, a wealth of customizable pre-defined components, descriptive logging for error messages, and ease of install with a light footprint make it very effective to use."
"We switched to CloverETL because of its flexibility to connect to various data sources and no dependence on native language and ease of use."
"We have gone from an organization that looked backwards at financials and had a one-time annual budget to an organization that looks forward, has rolling forecasts, long-term planning, metrics, and push button reporting."
"Forecasting changes that instantly flow through all financial statements."
"Changes to corporate structure, account codes are updated in all versions including prior years, hence "one-version of truth" as claimed."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"The biggest feature is the source of truth for all of our budget and forecast versions."
"We utilize planning on a daily basis, therefore we find it to be the most valuable product for our organization."
"Customer Service: Excellent, always available and hardly needed."
"Reduced planning and budgeting time - it takes hardly a couple of days to complete my entire budgeting exercise, uploading actual data and generating monthly reports with comparison of actual versus budgets in no time."
 

Cons

"​Resource management: We typically run out of heap space, and even the allocation of high heap space does not seem to be enough.​"
"Needs easier automated failure recovery, more and more intuitive auto-generated or filled-in code for components, and easier or more automated sync between CloverETL Designer and CloverETL Server."
"Its documentation could be improved.​"
"It's a Workday product; they could do a little bit better to integrate a pure-play integration with Workday, which really doesn't do that."
"Pricing can be made better affordable to SMEs. Every year price increase is an issue."
"The product's configuration process could be faster."
"Being able to drill down when using OfficeConnect needs work."
"We tried Discovery and OfficeConnect at one point and found them too cumbersome, at the time."
"The upload feature exists, but isn't terribly useful."
"Adaptive Insights has a limit of 1,00,000 rows for HTML reports. It should be improved because we will have multiple dimensions that need to be populated to enhance the image."
"Needing to focus on upgrades for all industries, including CPG."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Adaptive Insights' pricing is relative to its peer competitors. It's certainly competitive compared to a spreadsheet template that you build in Excel. It can be expensive if you need to have 100-500 budget holders giving input and building financial plans. However, in that case, it becomes an extremely good bargain. Compared to its competitors, it offers an excellent value."
"Adaptive Insights' pricing is reasonable."
"Ensure that you have the proper pricing plan in place."
"It's affordable."
"Prior to purchasing licenses, make sure you understand which users will only need planning and which users will need both planning and OfficeConnect."
"Licensing seems to be worth the cost considering the efficiency Adaptive brings."
"Everything is negotiable, but this solution is low cost compared to others."
"Pricing is in line with other cloud-based EPM tools. It is a subscription-based model based upon the number of users and site type if it's an admin or end-user type thing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Visualization solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
27%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Retailer
6%
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise10
 

Also Known As

No data available
Workday Adaptive Planning, Adaptive Discovery , Workday Adaptive Planning
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, Oracle, MuleSoft, GoodData, Thomson Reuters, salesforce.com, Comcast, Active Network, SHOP.CA
1. Cisco Systems 2. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated 3. Deloitte 4. DocuSign 5. Dropbox 6. Electronic Arts 7. Fender Musical Instruments Corporation 8. Fitbit 9. Fossil Group 10. Groupon 11. Hilton Worldwide 12. HP Inc. 13. Intuit 14. Johnson & Johnson 15. LinkedIn 16. Lyft 17. McAfee 18. Medtronic 19. Netflix 20. Oracle 21. Pandora 22. PayPal 23. Pinterest 24. Red Hat 25. Salesforce 26. ServiceNow 27. Slack Technologies 28. Spotify 29. Symantec 30. Tableau Software 31. Twitter 32. Workday
Find out what your peers are saying about CloverETL vs. Workday Adaptive Planning and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.