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

Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) vs Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 11, 2025

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

Informatica Intelligent Dat...
Ranking in Data Governance
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
214
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (2nd), Data Quality (1st), Business Process Management (BPM) (6th), Business-to-Business Middleware (2nd), API Management (6th), Cloud Data Integration (3rd), Test Data Management (3rd), Cloud Master Data Management (MDM) (1st), Data Management Platforms (DMP) (2nd), Data Masking (2nd), Metadata Management (2nd), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (3rd), Test Data Management Services (3rd), Product Information Management (PIM) (1st), Data Observability (2nd), AI Data Analysis (1st)
Microsoft Purview Data Life...
Ranking in Data Governance
27th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Email Archiving (9th), Document Management Software (2nd), Microsoft Security Suite (30th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) is 4.9%, down from 8.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is 1.2%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Governance Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC)4.9%
Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management1.2%
Other93.9%
Data Governance
 

Featured Reviews

Divya-Raj - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Consultant cum Assistant Manager & Offshore Lead at Deloitte
Handles large data volumes effectively and offers competitive pricing
There is a lot of improvement required, as we still face some cache issues most of the time, which is a challenge that we expect to see resolved in the future. Additionally, there is some limitation when we are working with a tool, especially regarding In and Out parameters, and I feel that this aspect should be improved going ahead. We face issues with the API side, as Cloud Application Integration cannot handle large volumes; according to the API page, there is a limitation of 500 records or 500 MB. The AI integrated into the Informatica Intelligent Cloud Services solution is called Application Integration, where we still face challenges when dealing with huge volumes, as previously explained.
RK
Cloud Security & Governance at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
A comprehensive data management solution shows potential for improvement while providing strong integration with existing infrastructure
One of the requirements is to have data leak policies and data access policies. This is very critical to enforce data governance standards, which relate to data classification, access control, data protection, and retention. It covers the entire lifecycle, helping us to protect, detect, and classify the documents. Challenges are mostly related to the security products onboarded into the bank; they have challenges in terms of those products complying with the internal standards. Sometimes, we cannot just use the DLP across the state. For example, using Microsoft products has been easy to adopt, such as OneDrive and SharePoint on-premise, but it becomes a challenge when it comes to AWS, as data also exists in S3 buckets. Testing is still ongoing, but it will eventually be done. The time it takes to scan is one issue; when we raise high-volume issues and tickets related to scanning failures, it relates to permission errors, which are technical challenges. These take time because we have high volume tickets in terms of connectivity, scanning failures, and related matters. There are also frequent change requests, especially regarding scoping or rescoping due to complexities, creating several challenges. In both organizations I work with, there are gaps, and there is no enterprise-wide data classification available. However, there are pockets of implementations for various products. Some agencies are using it, but otherwise, there's no product existing across the enterprise. Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is definitely a good solution, but there is significant room for improvement from a product perspective. Reporting is another area that needs improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Informatica MDM's most valuable feature is the interconnection between multiple Master Data domains."
"I like that Informatica MDM has robust matching technology. Informatica MDM is also porting the external Java applications for validations. I can consider that a must-have. It is also exposed to Rest API calls, and we can engage in real-time integrations with any third-party systems."
"The profiling feature in Informatica Data Quality is incredibly effective for data governance."
"The advanced features like task flow and conditional integration are particularly useful."
"The most valuable features of Informatica Cloud Data Integration for our clients are the AI capabilities within Informatica Intelligent Cloud Services."
"The interface has a great look and feel, and the functionality is so easy."
"The solution's scalability is high."
"The most valuable feature is the building of mockups and tasks."
"The system is stable; I haven't encountered any worldwide stability issues unlike other office products."
"The UI is the most valuable feature."
"The automatic data labeling is compelling, and we are investigating its use."
"The impact of Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management on my unified data catalog has improved a lot; the improvements I see are in the lineage, the discovery, and the labeling."
"Purview's built-in functionality provides immediate access to reports, streamlining the entire process."
 

Cons

"Exploring the possibility of incorporating AI capabilities that can suggest additional rules would significantly streamline our data analysis process following data profiling."
"They have to improve their relationship discovery tool. They say that they have AI inside, but this AI did not automatically find relationships or suggested relationships between entities."
"Its cloud-based version has a few limitations compared to the on-premise version."
"The tool's performance is an area that should be given further consideration."
"There's certainly room for improvement. One crucial area is generating detailed reports on file statuses. Presently, this is represented visually, often as graphs or charts. Such reporting could offer comprehensive insights into the areas that demand attention and further scrutiny."
"You cannot import the data discovery rules you create in the solution to the Cloud Data Governance and Catalog (CDGC)."
"IEDC can improve the comparison of lineages."
"It can be improved in terms of performance and execution. I'm expecting better performance. It currently has some restrictions in terms of execution. For example, if we want to run it in the command mode and execute it, there are some restrictions, and we are facing some issues with a huge volume of data. These restrictions are not there in Informatica PowerCenter because we are able to execute a huge volume of data, and there are more ways to execute it."
"Microsoft's Purview Data Lifecycle Management preview features can be unreliable, hindering their usefulness."
"Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management can be challenging to implement due to its complexity and dense documentation, making it difficult to get started."
"I think labeling could use a lot more AI assistance. AI implementation into labeling would be beneficial."
"Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management can be challenging to implement due to its complexity and dense documentation, making it difficult to get started."
"The time it takes to scan is one issue; when we raise high-volume issues and tickets related to scanning failures, it relates to permission errors, which are technical challenges."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is difficult to understand, but the team is always available to explain anything. They are very helpful."
"Informatica Cloud Data Integration is famously known for its high price. The vendor targets large enterprises, and not medium or small companies. These large companies, and organizations, handle large amounts of data. If you go into any large bank, such as American or Canadian banks, these banks use this solution because it is more reliable, secure, and has more functionality."
"The product is very expensive"
"Our customers sometimes are able to negotiate a much better price for Informatica Cloud Data Integration based on their relationship with the vendor."
"You pay for this solution based on IPUs, Informatica Processing Units. This depends on how much data you process and how much memory you consume from the cloud provider, and you pay as you go."
"It's pretty high for us. It's more on the higher side, like low to middle high."
"The product has a high price point."
"Informatica MDM's pricing is not cheap but comparable to other vendors."
"The service operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, charging an extra one cent per field of metadata scanned in our data."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business51
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise153
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Azure Data Factory compare with Informatica Cloud Data Integration?
Azure Data Factory is a solid product offering many transformation functions; It has pre-load and post-load transformations, allowing users to apply transformations either in code by using Power Q...
Which Informatica product would you choose - PowerCenter or Cloud Data Integration?
Complex transformations can easily be achieved using PowerCenter, which has all the features and tools to establish a real data governance strategy. Additionally, PowerCenter is able to manage huge...
What are the biggest benefits of using Informatica Cloud Data Integration?
When it comes to cloud data integration, this solution can provide you with multiple benefits, including: Overhead reduction by integrating data on any cloud in various ways Effective integration ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management?
We opted for Purview Data Lifecycle Management due to its significant cost advantage over competitors. At a 95 percent price reduction, it was a clear winner. The service operates on a pay-as-you-g...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management?
I think labeling could use a lot more AI assistance. AI implementation into labeling would be beneficial.
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management?
My major use case for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is for the classification of data.
 

Also Known As

ActiveVOS, Active Endpoints, Address Verification, Persistent Data Masking
Microsoft Information Governance, Microsoft Purview Records Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The Travel Company, Carbonite
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) vs. Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.