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

MEGA HOPEX vs No Magic MagicDraw 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

MEGA HOPEX
Ranking in Business Process Design
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (4th), GRC (4th)
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 3.1%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.7%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
MEGA HOPEX3.1%
No Magic MagicDraw2.7%
Other94.2%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

JorgeValdez - PeerSpot reviewer
A simple and intuitive tool that provides more features than other tools in the market
The solution can be used to model customer journeys and business processes I use the solution for my customers to model banking products. I also model and define business capability. The biggest value of the product is that we can use it to work in different industries like government,…
DiegoRangel - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced team communication and design exploration with integrated simulation tools
I was using No Magic MagicDraw to model operations, such as using different kinds of operations with ships or crafts and other systems No Magic MagicDraw facilitated great communication within the team and allowed for the exploration of different designs and architectures, which was beneficial…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Every module sets up the same information in a unique repository."
"I have observed MegaHOPEX has capabilities in architecture and other areas."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the reuse of common enterprise components and entities."
"The most valuable feature of MEGA HOPEX is the publication method for static websites. You can generate the whole database into a static website. Additionally, in the new tabular entry, you don't have to put objects or links, you can go and fill a tab and the MEGA HOPEX will generate an object for you in a simple way."
"It is very interactive."
"The most valuable feature is that the software controls everything from a single management window."
"The initial setup was straightforward. With configuration, customizing or prepping the data and deployment, it took about one year to set up. We only needed two people to deploy and maintain the solution: one business architect and someone who specializes in customization and operations."
"Its availability is very good."
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
"No Magic has the tools and capability to model a complete enterprise and all product lines."
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
"It is very user-friendly, and the customer service is really good."
"When you look at it, No Magic is an all-encompassing tool. You can use it for business architecture design. You can use it for deploying an ERP system across your enterprise. However, it was initially designed and developed for model-based systems engineering. That's the systems engineering required to either produce an IP system or product. It takes away the mounds of paper and puts it into a model. It enables you to generate significant savings by modeling that new product or that system before you ever start developing a prototype."
"The most valuable feature of No Magic MagicDraw is the simulation capabilities and interface."
"I like the traceability feature. Whoever is working with the product would be sure of the things that could be affected if they decided to affect one of the other companies. For example, let's say that an engineer starts a new project optimization problem by adjusting the thickness of metal sheets. However, the engineers only see a reduced number of affections, but when we use the requirement traceability, they can see the whole picture. That's the main aspect that we were promoting with this tool."
"I would rate MagicDraw a nine out of ten because of the price. Enterprise Architect has a lot of bugs and MagicDraw is a lot more accurate and flexible. It's a level better."
 

Cons

"The features are limited. I'm hoping in the future the solution will be bigger and include more items. Right now, overall, it needs more."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"MEGA HOPEX's problem is that it is expensive, but it's a fantastic tool."
"This product is expensive and would be improved by lowering its price."
"They do tend to push people to their professional services, instead of helping the customers with their problems. I understand this is their business. At the same time, however, they need to work on fact sheets or offer some program to help the customers who want to implement it themselves and to make it run properly in their environment."
"The tool's UI should be more user-friendly."
"The initial setup can be quite complex at first."
"MEGA HOPEX can improve process simulation in the BPA module. If the solution was better we would not have to use another solution for this purpose. Simulating scenarios in the future for the to-be processes is in demand. If we can have the simulation engine built inside MEGA HOPEX, we would not have to purchase another license or solution to integrate them with each other. This would be a great improvement."
"There's lots of documentation. They process multiples of guides. They've got all kinds of guides and documentation out there, but it's kind of hard to find. There are a lot of videos. You can go to YouTube and find videos on how it's been used in different ways, but it just kind of scratches the surface."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"The licenses are expensive compared to similar tools. At the moment, the user is open to using MagicDraw if it's 15% more than other solutions. If it were to cost any more, they wouldn't use it."
"Some of No Magic MagicDraw's most valuable features were its integration with other simulation tools, such as MATLAB, the seasonal plugin, and the Rangel simulation toolkit."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work."
"One potential area for improvement is the recommendation feature. At times, we face challenges in locating specific features, and we have to reach out for assistance in finding the information we need."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product has a high cost."
"If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive."
"The price of the support depends on the vendors that are reselling this module or the MEGA HOPEX version 5. We are on premium support and are their only partners in the GCC, we have a premium support contract with them. The support we have is not with the client. The client does not bear the cost, it's us who bear the cost."
"The pricing depends on the number of licenses purchased."
"MEGA HOPEX's licensing costs are yearly."
"The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"The tool is relatively expensive."
"It is very expensive."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
"The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
23%
Government
13%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise24
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

Any experience with Strategic Project Portfolio Management Solutions?
Hi @Cheryl Joseph ​Looking at the crossover between Project and Portfolio management with EA, then Planview could be a good choice. If looking at Portfolio Management from an EA perspective then Le...
What do you like most about No Magic MagicDraw?
There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for No Magic MagicDraw?
Maybe the price is a little bit high for a small company to acquire this tool. However, they offer trial versions and trial licenses for members of INCOSE.
What needs improvement with No Magic MagicDraw?
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works...
 

Also Known As

No data available
MagicDraw
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aetna, Fannie Mae, M&T Bank, Glatfelter Insurance Group, Zions Management Services Company, The College Board, Baxter Credit Union, AXA Financial, Missouri Department of Conservation, New York State OTDA, MEG Energy Corp, Walgreens, Procter & Gamble, Biogen Idec, Gilead Sciences, Organic Valley, Trinity Health, Nissan and Ford
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
Find out what your peers are saying about MEGA HOPEX vs. No Magic MagicDraw and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.