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

Fivetran vs Skyvia comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 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

Fivetran
Ranking in Data Integration
14th
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Data Replication (3rd)
Skyvia
Ranking in Data Integration
56th
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
26th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of Fivetran is 4.2%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyvia is 1.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Fivetran4.2%
Skyvia1.4%
Other94.4%
Cloud Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Hafiz Usman - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead Data Engineer at Data Pilot
Has accelerated data integration workflows and supports seamless development of custom connectors
I've worked extensively with Fivetran, mainly used for extraction purposes, and I've worked with the transformation element in it as well. Fivetran not only has built-in connectors but also provides SDK connectors, allowing us to develop our own connectors in an easy manner. I don't have to write raw Python scripts or dumping scripts; it offers straightforward examples and guidelines, making it much simpler to develop custom connectors inside Fivetran. We've been able to develop many custom connectors as well, which is unique and beneficial for having everything centralized instead of having those connectors located elsewhere. One of the best features by Fivetran is its clean, simple, and intuitive UI. It includes a transformation section where I can deploy my DBT queries and scripts. It also supplies good tracking capabilities for billing estimates and user permissions, allowing for customization to the desired level. The number of connectors it has remains a standout feature, and within connectors, the options available are very helpful. Although it sometimes appears static due to its built-in nature, it offers good flexibility for data transformation and caching, which I appreciate because it saves us extensive script-writing time.
RH
CTO & Developer at a consultancy with self employed
The product works, is simple to use, and is reliable.
Error handling. This has caused me many problems in the past. When an error occurs, the event on the connection that is called does not seem to behave as documented. If I attempt a retry or opt not to display an error dialog, it does it anyway. In all fairness, I have never reported this. I think it is more important that a unique error code is passed to the error event that identifies a uniform type of error that occurred, such as ecDisconnect, eoInvalidField. It is very hard to find what any of the error codes currently passed actually mean. A list would be great for each database engine. Trying to catch an exception without displaying the UniDAC error message is impossible, no matter how you modify the parameters in the OnError of the TUniConnection object. I have already implemented the following things myself. They are suggestions rather than specific requests. Copy Datasets: This contains an abundance of redundant options. I think that a facility to copy one dataset to another in a single call would be handy. Redundancy: I am currently working on this. I have extended the TUniConnection to have an additional property called FallbackConnection. If the TUniConnection goes offline, the connection attempts to connect the FallbackConnection. If successful, it then sets the Connection properties of all live UniDatasets in the app to the FallbackConnection and re-opens them if necessary. The extended TUniConnection holds a list of datasets that were created. Each dataset is responsible for registering itself with the connection. This is a highly specific feature. It supports an offline mode that is found in mission critical/point of sale solutions. I have never seen it implement before in any DACs, but I think it is a really unique feature with a big impact. Dataset to JSON/XML: A ToSql function on a dataset that creates a full SQL Text statement with all parameters converted to text (excluding blobs) and included in the returned string. Extended TUniScript:- TMyUniScript allows me to add lines of text to a script using the normal dataset functions, Script.Append, Script.FieldByName(‘xxx’).AsString := ‘yyy’, Script.AddToScript and finally Script.Post, then Script.Commit. The AddToScript builds the SQL text statement and appends it to the script using #e above. Record Size Calculation. It would be great if UniDac could estimate the size of a particular record from a query or table. This could be used to automatically set the packet fetch/request count based on the size of the Ethernet packets on the local area network. This I believe would increase performance and reduce network traffic for returning larger datasets. I am aware that this would also be a unique feature to UniDac but would gain a massive performance enhancement. I would suggest setting the packet size on the TUniConnection which would effect all linked datasets.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product has some seamless connectors, which are readily available."
"Fivetran's most valuable feature is replication."
"The most valuable feature of Fivetran is that it only synchronizes what needs to be synchronized."
"Making the decision to implement Fivetran was supported by the fact that they have better connectors than other competitors."
"You can manage all of your connectors individually, which gives you a very good ability to trace which one of your ETL processes is running and when."
"Overall, I would rate Fivetran nine out of ten."
"The ease of usability is the most valuable feature. It's very easy and quick to set up. It also has a central hub as opposed to GoldenGate which is one direct interface. For GoldenGate I would have needed three interfaces whereas with HVR I have a central interface that manages everything."
"The simplicity of the solution is its valuable feature."
"For what it offers, I think this solution is a must for any Delphi programmer."
 

Cons

"Fivetran is very expensive for data sources with a lot of rows, such as email data. I would like to see cheaper pricing for data sources like that."
"The solution is very expensive. I would like to have a better integration of the solution with Azure."
"More connectors are needed for exotic, popular, and rising star portals."
"I would like for them to incorporate additional transformations."
"The documentation is decent, but it's hard to find information online about Fivetran. For example, if you try to search for an error code, you won't find much information about it in forums."
"The documentation can be laid out better to make it easier to find things, and I really wish there was built-in support for changing passwords. Some features don't work as advertised for the platform/repository database, and HVR is not always the fastest at getting results."
"It should have a few more monitoring functionalities."
"In our case, we ultimately did not end up using Fivetran because we were able to do custom connects at a lower cost compared to Fivetran. From a cost perspective, if the number of connectors is lesser, then Fivetran is not the most cost-efficient option."
"Error handling has caused me many problems in the past; when an error occurs, the event on the connection that is called does not seem to behave as documented."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing model is okay and mid to large companies will not have an issue with it."
"The product is reasonably expensive"
"I rate the pricing a six out of ten."
"The licensing costs are extremely high for the usage of somebody who has one GB or two GB of usage per day for real-time traffic. There are many other players in the market which are similarly priced or competitively priced. On average per month, it used to come around 12,000-15,000 USD, which is very high."
"I've heard that the license for HVR is a bit costly compared to its competitors, but since it's reliable and efficient, I think the customer shouldn't be bothered about the cost."
"Fivetran is very expensive, and its database-driven pricing model is outdated."
"I don't have the exact information, but I know it is high, and it is on a yearly basis. There is no additional cost for what we're doing. We're always open to doing things cheaper, so we might potentially implement a different solution."
"The solution is affordable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
Performing Arts
20%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise16
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What's the deal with the HVR software acquisition?
As a user of HVR Software I followed this deal closely. Fivetran is apparently trying to establish more in its sector and by buying an already established data replication software, they become som...
Does HVR Software provide reliable insights?
I honestly can't think of another data replication software that can give you better statistics and insight than HVR Software. There's the feature for topology and statistics and both of them can ...
How much traffic can HVR Software handle?
As someone who works at a company where a high volume of information is replicated and has tried several data replication softwares, I can tell you that you're looking at the right one. HVR Softwar...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Skyvia, Skyvia Data Integration
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Autodesk, Condé Nast, JetBlue, Morgan Stanley, OpenAI, LVMH, Pfizer, Verizon, SpotifyNational Australia Bank, Saks, Cemex, Okta, Dropbox, Pitney Bowes, World Fuel Services,Lufthansa, AutoZone, ASICS, ASOS, Coupa, Databricks, Hermes, New Relic, Intercom,Canva, Honeywell, Square, DocuSign, Nandos, Oldcastle Infrastructure
Boeing, Sony, Honda, Oracle, BMW, Samsung
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Informatica, Salesforce and others in Cloud Data Integration. Updated: May 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.