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

Microsoft Purview Data Governance vs OvalEdge 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

Microsoft Purview Data Gove...
Ranking in Data Governance
2nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (14th)
OvalEdge
Ranking in Data Governance
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of Microsoft Purview Data Governance is 9.2%, down from 20.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OvalEdge is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Governance Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Purview Data Governance9.2%
OvalEdge0.8%
Other90.0%
Data Governance
 

Featured Reviews

AS
Tech lead at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Automated data discovery has streamlined management while configuration remains complex
Compared to Big-ID, Microsoft Purview Data Governance looks complicated to me. I do not feel it has a good user-level UI. The interface feels a little complicated compared to Big-ID. I did not appreciate the configuration part. It felt complex, whereas when I went for a Big-ID demo, the interface looked better and was easier to understand for any user.
AzhagarasanAnnadorai - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Kaizentric Technologies Private Limited
Enables comprehensive data governance with role-based access and directory integration
The UI is straightforward for technical users with organized features under different modules like data catalog and business glossary. The role-based access control and integration with the directory system allow strict governance and limited user access. The APIs are comprehensive, enabling integration with other systems even for creating virtual data catalogs.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is very easy to learn the interface, and it is very user-friendly."
"The reporting is excellent. Limiting what people can see is also valuable, especially when tagging documents."
"I use the tool in projects as a medium to provide information as reports to the stakeholders."
"My favorite Purview feature is auto-scanning. Once we set up Purview, we can automatically scan multiple data sources when new data comes into specific databases, like SQL and Oracle. We don't need to rediscover the new data or do anything manually because it automatically happens."
"Microsoft Purview's most valuable feature is its ability to identify content across a number of prescribed regulatory frameworks, including Microsoft, GDPR, PII, and UCC Financial."
"The most valuable feature is the tracking activity and device onboarding."
"Has a good interface and is reasonably priced."
"Overall, the potential for this solution is really large."
"The UI is straightforward for technical users with organized features under different modules like data catalog and business glossary."
"Over time, OvalEdge has improved significantly."
 

Cons

"The Microsoft Purview data connector platform, which supports ingestion from non-Microsoft data sources, can be somewhat complex."
"Compared to Big-ID, Microsoft Purview Data Governance looks complicated to me. I do not feel it has a good user-level UI."
"We are currently in the rollout phase, so I am not entirely sure about specific areas of improvement. However, there are some problems with DLP rules, and it would be great if the security around DLP could be expanded."
"The product needs improvement to edit the number of assets. It needs to be more inuitive as well."
"Support should be improved in the form of good documentation and video lessons where a person can check things out. There is a community, but it takes a lot of time if we want to get an answer to a question."
"There should be more clarity about the costing, particularly how the cost is calculated, especially when utilizing health reports and quality features."
"I'd like to see them improve the training for implementing this type of solution."
"Reflecting organizational changes within Purview is impractical."
"The lack of connectivity to mainframe systems and the complexity of integration are areas needing improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I consider it cost-efficient because of the metrics it provides."
"Microsoft Purview requires a Microsoft 365 license and is included with an E5 license."
"Microsoft Purview is priced in the middle. It isn't the cheapest, but it isn't the most expensive. It's affordable compared to other public cloud services."
"It is cheap. It is based on consumption. If somebody wants to start using it, the price is definitely cheaper than a tool like Collibra."
"The price is a little bit high, but it's worth the money because it has a lot of features."
"Microsoft Purview is a subscription-based service, so we need either an E3 or E5 license to use it."
"The interesting part is how they are bundling the version into the E5 stack. If it was not for that inclusion, this would have been a difficult conversation for us, so kudos to Microsoft on that. Separating it out may become a problem for customer retention. It is definitely a good move on Microsoft's part to include it as part of any existing or any system upgrades for customers that were on E3."
"Purview's price is pretty high when you factor in storage costs."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
Construction Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise33
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Purview?
Microsoft Purview Data Governance is quite affordable compared to other market solutions, which have high initial costs. It allows for a cost-effective start with negligible initial cost. However, ...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Purview?
The features in the actual data governance could be improved, and I think there is room for improvement in the product. We haven't used role-based access control in a complex way; it's somehow embe...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Azure Purview?
We are currently working with Microsoft Purview Data Governance and other Microsoft products. We are using Microsoft Purview Data Governance.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OvalEdge?
The pricing is affordable compared to other tools, and we opted for 500 user license.
What needs improvement with OvalEdge?
The lack of connectivity to mainframe systems and the complexity of integration with legacy data systems are areas needing improvement. Advanced jobs require extra training and fine-tuning, making ...
What is your primary use case for OvalEdge?
GDPR compliance and enabling users to understand the transformation of data from one database to another. It is used mainly as a data catalog for data discovery, allowing users to understand the da...
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Purview, MS Azure Purview
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Beaumont CHKD, UpWork, Pon, Rakuten, Verbund, Globe, Naranja
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Purview Data Governance vs. OvalEdge and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.