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

IBM Cloud Pak for Data vs Palantir Gotham comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

IBM Cloud Pak for Data
Ranking in Data Integration
24th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Data Virtualization (3rd)
Palantir Gotham
Ranking in Data Integration
50th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Data Integration category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Pak for Data is 2.0%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palantir Gotham is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Michelle Leslie - PeerSpot reviewer
Starts strong with data management capabilities but needs a demo database
What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated. There are so many components to data management, and more often than not, people understand one thing really well. They may understand DataStage and how to move data around, but they do not see the impact of moving data incorrectly. They also do not see the impact of everyone understanding a piece of data in the same way. I would love Cloud Pak to come with a demo database that illustrates the different components of data management in a logical way, so I can see the whole picture instead of just the area I'm specializing in. It would be great if Cloud Pak, from a data modeling point of view, allowed us to import our PDMs, for example. It would be ideal to import and create business terms in Cloud Pak. The PEA would be great to create the technical data. The association between the business and the technical metadata could then be automated by pulling it through from your ACE models. The data modeling component is available in Cloud Pak. Additionally, when it comes to Cloud Pak, even though it has the NextGen DataStage built into it, there is Cloud Pak for data integration as well. Currently, I do not think we have a full enough understanding of how CP4D and CP4I can enhance each other.
WH
A seamless all-in-one solution
This solution is seamless. From one platform, we can do just about anything. With other solutions, you'll need a separate platform for data ingestion, manipulation, etc. Then you'll need another tool for reporting. Palantir Gotham literally does it all. It generates a report regardless of the format. It can seamlessly generate it after the data has been collected.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of IBM Cloud Pak for Data are the Watson Studio, where we can initiate more groups and write code. Additionally, Watson Machine Learning is available with many other services, such as APIs which you can plug the machine learning models."
"What I found most helpful in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is containerization, which means it's easy to shift and leave in terms of moving to other clouds. That's an advantage of IBM Cloud Pak for Data."
"You can model the data there, connect the data models with the business processes and create data lineage processes."
"DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources."
"One of Cloud Pak's best features is the Watson Knowledge Catalog, which helps you implement data governance."
"IBM Watson Catalog and data pipelines are the most valuable features of the solution."
"Cloud Pak is a very, very, very good system."
"This solution is seamless. From one platform, we can do just about anything."
 

Cons

"The product is trying to be more maturity in terms of connectors. That, I believe, is an area where Cloud Pak can improve."
"What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated."
"The product must improve its performance."
"The interface could improve because sometimes it becomes slow. Sometimes there is a delay between clicks when using the software, which can make the development process slow. It can take a few seconds to complete one action, and then a few more seconds to do the next one."
"Cloud Pak would be improved with integration with cloud service providers like Cloudera."
"One challenge I'm facing with IBM Cloud Pak for Data is native features have been decommissioned, such as XML input and output. Too many changes have been made, and my company has around one hundred thousand mappings, so my team has been putting more effort into alternative ways to do things. Another area for improvement in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is that it's more complicated to shift from on-premise to the cloud. Other vendors provide secure agents that easily connect with your existing setup. Still, with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, you have to perform connection migration steps, upgrade to the latest version, etc., which makes it more complicated, especially as my company has XML-based mappings. Still, the XML input and output capabilities of IBM Cloud Pak for Data have been discontinued, so I'd like IBM to bring that back."
"The solution's catalog searching or map search needs to be improved."
"The technical support could be a little better."
"I think there should be less coding involved. Currently, using it involves a tremendous amount of coding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For the licensing of the solution, there is a yearly payment that needs to be made. Also, since it is expensive, cost-wise, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten."
"I think that this product is too expensive for smaller companies."
"The solution's pricing is competitive with that of other vendors."
"IBM Cloud Pak for Data is expensive. If we include the training time and the machine learning, it's expensive. The cost of the execution is more reasonable."
"I don't have the exact licensing cost for IBM Cloud Pak for Data, as my company is still finalizing requirements, including monthly, yearly, and three-year licensing fees. Still, on a scale of one to five, I'd rate it a three because, compared to other vendors, it's more complicated."
"The solution is expensive."
"Cloud Pak's cost is a little high."
"It's quite expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
11%
University
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
The setup cost is very expensive. The cost depends on the pieces of the solution I'm using, how much data I have, and whether it's on the cloud or on-prem.
What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Pak for Data?
What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated. There are so many components to data...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cloud Pak for Data
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Qatar Development Bank, GuideWell, Skanderborg Music Festival
Team Rubicon, CGI
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Talend and others in Data Integration. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.