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

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne vs Microsoft Dynamics GP 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

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne
Ranking in ERP
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Activity Based Costing Software (3rd), Production Planning (1st), Demand Management (2nd)
Microsoft Dynamics GP
Ranking in ERP
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the ERP category, the mindshare of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is 2.7%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Dynamics GP is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ERP Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
JD Edwards EnterpriseOne2.7%
Microsoft Dynamics GP1.4%
Other95.9%
ERP
 

Featured Reviews

Euan Ellis - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of IT Applications at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Has supported global operations through multi-currency and modular customization
Oracle's support is not that good for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne. Their support is expensive, and I don't think you're getting your bang for your buck. For the cloud product, they do give you support, but everything is online and you might not get somebody. I would give Oracle's support for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne about a 6.5 on a scale of one to 10.
reviewer2723988 - PeerSpot reviewer
Executive Director, Digital & Technology at a tech consulting company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Integration and flexibility deliver outstanding business experiences with innovative platforms enhancements
Scale is a primary concern. If the product vision continues to serve small and mid-cap companies, they need to continue incorporating features into the out-of-the-box solution because small-caps typically lack budget for in-house IT organizations to customize and maintain systems. If they want to expand beyond mid-cap and enter the large-cap market, they need to consider balance and provide more customizability. This includes extending process flows through more APIs and building a more modular architecture with granular backend exposed via API. The process layer should allow clients to customize while invoking back-office APIs. The general perception positions Microsoft Dynamics GP in the middle of the market. Systems such as NetSuite and ServiceNow occupy the lower category, providing narrow use cases. Microsoft Dynamics GP offers more breadth and out-of-the-box capabilities at a slightly higher price point. At the top end, SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce offer extensive customizability at a premium price, suitable for large organizations with multiple transactions and customers. Microsoft Dynamics GP currently occupies a favorable position in the middle segment with limited competition.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The good thing about it is that it is very customizable; we can modify it the way we want, and with the new versions it has become very user-friendly with mobile integration, cloud-based solutions, and many things that can be done by front-end users without technical knowledge, including creating reports without any coding."
"When you're comparing JD Edwards to any other tool, look at the flexibility."
"The most valuable feature is the scope of functionality that JD Edwards covers."
"Financial reports are clearer and better aligned with business expectations."
"JD Edwards is highly scalable and suitable for both small teams and large enterprises with hundreds of users."
"Maximizes the investment via industry focus, flexible personalization, configuration, product scalability, and mobile options."
"The solution excels in costing and work order processing. JD Edwards EnterpriseOne manages multiple manufacturing modes in the same process effectively."
"EnterpriseOne has been the product that allows us to focus on our products and not on our ERP, and this means a lot."
"Customer service is very good and technical support is very good."
"The product is very user-friendly and is easy to navigate, and you can track everything from beginning to end quite easily."
"The initial setup was very easy; you do not need a lot of technical in-depth knowledge to handle the implementation, and the stability is reliable."
"The fixed assets, payroll, the data module, and user-friendliness are most valuable."
"The stability was reliable."
"It is a tried and tested ERP system which if used correctly, is definitely a very good program for managing all aspects of a business from customer sales, and receivables management, to payable management and finance reporting. So, it's super critical for any mid-sized company."
"Numerous third-party add-on products are available to purchase for specific business needs."
"Microsoft Dynamics GP has strong out-of-the-box reporting capabilities, and its integration with Office 365, Power Apps, and Power Platform provides great additional benefits, helping deliver better experiences to employees and customers."
 

Cons

"They need to improve the logs and need to write some sort of script that clears logs after so many days."
"Customer / Supplier Relationship."
"We originally used EnterpriseOne for preventative maintenance, but it is not very good at that so we migrated to Maximo for that task."
"Some modules are expensive and there is an annual software maintenance cost as well."
"The software is highly modular and thereby exposes the risk of different implementation choices for each module."
"It does not submit the inquiry as requested. We have to close the application and restart the computer."
"While it is easy to handle, there is room for improvement compared to more sophisticated ERP systems."
"I think they could maybe expand the financial side."
"There should also be extra redundancy when posting to modules."
"This is now a legacy product, so they're phasing it out over time."
"It still can be improved in web-based and build reporting. ​"
"The purchase order and processing aspects of the solution should be improved."
"Scale is a primary concern. If the product vision continues to serve small and mid-cap companies, they need to continue incorporating features into the out-of-the-box solution because small-caps typically lack budget for in-house IT organizations to customize and maintain systems."
"With payroll, the payroll that they have offers US or Canadian tax. However, here, our tax payments are different from the US and Canada. It is very difficult to put in our tax tables. We need some customization. It should be readily available for any country to use according to their tax implications. The system should know different types of tax regimes around the world so that it can accommodate. It's a little bit rigid on that."
"Many of our customers are migrating to the cloud rather than staying on-premises."
"There should also be extra redundancy when posting to modules. We use different sets of books such as CashBook and CheckBooks therefore if I select the wrong one the solution allows the transaction to just pass without warning."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution is not cheap. However, it is priced average amongst competitors."
"The licensing costs are on a yearly basis, and there are no additional costs."
"The maintenance of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is expensive and overall the solution is expensive. Most enterprise operation solution is expensive."
"It's very competitively priced. The only problem now is that most of the industry is moving towards software as a service or a subscription model, whereas JD Edwards has a capital expenditure. You would spend on the licenses once off. You can either host it on-premise or in the cloud, but there is a licensing fee once a year."
"The pricing is very high. Even though the license is perpetual yet you have to get the maintenance. Since we pay using Pesos, it's very expensive."
"JD Edwards EnterpriseOne has a lot of value for the money. The implementation cost and license cost are quite reasonable compared to other solutions, such as Oracle EBS or SAP."
"The pricing is an "arm-and-a-leg". This keeps the customers away from going for J.D. Edwards."
"The solution’s pricing depends on the module you’re purchasing."
"I think the tool is competitively priced and it's more of a one-time investment with a low annual renewal fee."
"​We evaluated some local products, because of the pricing, but this product has better features and support."
"In comparison to other ERP systems, the pricing is not necessarily inexpensive, but it can be considered more cost-effective."
"Its pricing and licensing are high. Of course, we all know that it is Microsoft."
"It is an affordable solution."
"The solution's price is steep."
"I would say that the pricing is moderate, not cheap, and not expensive. There are many more expensive ERPs than GP, and there are less expensive as well, so it is moderately priced."
"For us, in our local currency, it costs us around 5 million Botswanan Pulas a year. It's quite a lot of money."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ERP solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Construction Company
22%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise32
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne?
Initially, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne was priced very high, and the licensing is very expensive. I think Oracle has revised those prices. Competition has perhaps forced them to revise those pricing b...
What advice do you have for others considering JD Edwards EnterpriseOne?
I have experience with similar solutions and also this product, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne. I haven't worked with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for the last 18 months, but I still know the product. I am f...
What needs improvement with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne?
JD Edwards EnterpriseOne's analytics are not that helpful. People generally attach other analytic solutions to it. This is something that JD Edwards EnterpriseOne could improve on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Dynamics GP?
D365 BC licensing SAAS model with subscription ranging $70/User/Month.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Dynamics GP?
Scale is a primary concern. If the product vision continues to serve small and mid-cap companies, they need to continue incorporating features into the out-of-the-box solution because small-caps ty...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Dynamics GP?
I have implemented Microsoft Dynamics GP in commercial and public sector organizations. In commercial pharma life sciences, Salesforce Veeva implementation supports commercial organizations doing p...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Dynamics GP, MS Dynamics GP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TechNova Imaging Systems (P) Ltd, Jordan Petroleum Refinery, Hosun Universal Co. Ltd., Grupo Corporativo Papelera SA de CV, Label Technology Inc., Uniwax S.A., Al Jaber Group, SOMAR Corporation, SICIM S.p.A.,
Rural Metro, WASH Multifamily Laundry, Kauffman Center for the Performing Arts, Elcome International LLC, Batteries Plus Corporate Stores, Catalogic Software, Choate Rosemary Hall
Find out what your peers are saying about JD Edwards EnterpriseOne vs. Microsoft Dynamics GP and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.