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 (3rd), 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 August 2025, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of MEGA HOPEX is 3.2%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.9%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
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

"The most valuable parts of this solution are the richness of its features and its easy interface."
"Customer support is fantastic. They are very helpful whenever we get on the line with the support team."
"The ability to customize is valuable."
"We use the portfolio management feature heavily."
"The most valuable features of MEGA HOPEX are the seamless VPA module and the good user experience. There are built-in connections that provide integration with other platforms, such as ServiceNow. There is a lot of customization available allowing a lot of freedom. The solution is updated frequently adding new features. For example, the feature GraphQL can be integrated into other solutions, such as ManageEngine for ITSM solutions. You are able to use GraphQL to connect APIs and query the APIs."
"You do not need to be a professional of enterprise modeling to contribute to the enrichment and improvement of the enterprise repository."
"What's most valuable in MEGA HOPEX is that it follows the reference model where each component is defined. I also like the diagram consistency in MEGA HOPEX."
"As a data governance leader, I am looking to understand the capabilities of Mega for data governance, such as data awareness, business glossary, data catalog, and some business rules or management."
"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 initial setup was not straightforward."
"The beauty of MagicDraw is that it has a simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it. The simulation allows you to bring in code off of an external code that you can write to set up the simulation and execute the code."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality."
"The most valuable features with No Magic MagicDraw are its ease of use; you can put this in front of a 12-year-old and they would know what to do right away."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to quickly build multiple layers within the organizational and business process environments, as well as in the SysML product environments, and converting to files that can be accessed by clients who do not have a system and a teamwork server access."
 

Cons

"It takes a long time to learn how to use HOPEX. It's hard to work with it because the user interface is bad. For example, if you want to build a complex system diagram, you need a lot of knowledge to do this correctly and make it readable. In MEGA, you need to create a report and it takes a long time to publish it. The publishing is offline. With RDoC, everything is online."
"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."
"In my experience, I've encountered difficulties with consuming custom packages in MEGA HOPEX, which leads to redundant work when deploying them to production. This is an area where improvement is needed. While version six offers better UI and UX, resolving this issue should be a priority. I believe it's important to fully explore MEGA HOPEX's capabilities before suggesting new ones."
"Scalability can be a problem sometimes."
"Standardization is lacking. The Operational Risk Function will be more effective if it at a default level follows established Basel standards for Loss categorization, Risk Assessments, Risk Event categorization, etc."
"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."
"This product is expensive and would be improved by lowering its price."
"We would like to see integration with other products, such as being able to use our workflow with SharePoint and Microsoft Office."
"For the next releases, I would like to have them import requirements from other sources. They could make it very easy to do that because there are a lot requirements management tools like DOORS, D-O-O-R-S, Dynamic Object Oriented Management. A lot of folks use DOORS to create a requirement. For those requirements you allocate them to a component in the architecture and a verification method for that requirement. It would be good if we could import those into MagicDraw as components so you don't have to manually do these things."
"It's very focused on specific modern languages and it doesn't do necessarily general systems software engineering with diagrams. They should expand the diagram types for the languages."
"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."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect. MagicDraw is stuck at C++03 standards, whereas most C++ programs today want to use the latest definition of the C++ standards. We were at C++11, and we wanted to do code engineering with C++11 or 17, but they didn't support it. That pushed us into a different tool, which is Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"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."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy live business process models and capture real-time data (without the need for another product tool) so you don't have to be dependent on other products for this functionality."
"The technical support is not very good."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"MEGA HOPEX's licensing costs are yearly."
"The tool is relatively expensive."
"The price of the MEGA HOPEX license could improve, it is expensive. The license key for business process analysis and IT architecture is approximately €10,000. This price is fixed, it's not a subscription or cloud-based version. It is a one-time price."
"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."
"I've been told that MEGA HOPEX is very expensive, which is why small organizations dismiss the tool. It's complex and costly versus other simpler and cheaper solutions."
"The product is reasonably priced for the value it offers. There's a good balance between cost and features."
"It is very expensive."
"If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"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)."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
22%
Government
14%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.