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

No Magic MagicDraw vs Visual Paradigm 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

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
Visual Paradigm
Ranking in Business Process Design
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.6%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Visual Paradigm is 4.5%, down from 6.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Visual Paradigm4.5%
No Magic MagicDraw2.6%
Other92.9%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2080611 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Ease of use and real-time collaboration empower effective teamwork and streamlined development
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 only with its IBM counterparts. SPARX Enterprise Architecture is very easy to use, but it's limited. It gives you an idea of how your model is developing, so this feature helps maintain integrity or correctness of system models. It's really a good feature to have. You've got to have the simulation toolkit installed to be able to do that, and that works really well. The MagicDraw or CAMEO system is good on its own, but it should be integrated and should come out of the box with the simulation toolkit because there are some things you can't do without it, making it very difficult to have to look for another license to be able to do that. I would prefer that it come with the simulation toolkit.
reviewer2097357 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at a aerospace/defense firm with 10,001+ employees
Innovation in diagramming has streamlined complex UML tasks
Visual Paradigm allowed me to create UML diagrams efficiently. The tool was smarter than other tools in terms of remembering the connections between components on the screen. For example, in other drawing programs, if I moved a box, I had to move the arrow, but Visual Paradigm handled those tasks automatically. This made it much quicker than using other tools like Visio or MagicDoor.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"No Magic has the tools and capability to model a complete enterprise and all product lines."
"The most valuable feature of No Magic MagicDraw is the simulation capabilities and interface."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
"The technical support is very good."
"The solution is very user-friendly. It's easy to just open it and start working."
"Visual Paradigm allowed me to create UML diagrams efficiently."
"Visual Paradigm is simple and easy to use."
"It is a scalable solution since it can be used at an individual level as well as for enterprise-sized businesses."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup was straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Paradigm is the ability to design form flows, add libraries, create organizational charts, and connect them all together."
"It is easy and intuitive to use, not excessively rigid, and quite flexible."
"Stable design software with multiple functions and features. It's simple to install and easy to use."
 

Cons

"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."
"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 documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"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."
"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."
"There could be a trial version for students."
"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 cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"Visual Paradigm is much better now. But each project has its own challenges, which is why I'm exploring different tools for my new projects. For instance, designing reports can be tough, especially with the costly intervention of professional services from vendors."
"There are some connectivity issues that crop up rarely when used with SQL Server."
"There is room for improvement in the licensing model. I would suggest implementing country-specific pricing, as many other products in India do. This would make Visual Paradigm more affordable and accessible."
"There is a certain inherent complexity when creating UML diagrams."
"It's still early for me to comment since I've only been using it for two months, but the responsiveness when diagramming needs to be improved."
"Visual Paradigm is heavier and has more complexity than one of its competitors, e.g. Lucidchart. It could have been better if it was more simplified."
"The user interface is not easy to navigate, so it should be made easier."
"For me, what needs improvement in Visual Paradigm is the limited features included in the $99 license, which is the cheapest option. If more features could be included in the cheapest licensing package, Visual Paradigm would be better, especially for businesses that have a limited budget for buying software."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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)."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"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."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"Visual Paradigm costs $99 per license. I chose the cheapest option from the pricing list."
"Pricing for Visual Paradigm is a four out of five for me. I'm happy with its pricing."
"Compared to other solutions such as IBM Rational which is expensive, This solution is priced low."
"In terms of pricing, I find Visual Paradigm's subscription services reasonable, especially for the modern and standard editions. However, the premium products can be a bit pricey, especially considering our location in the Middle East. Currently, paying around a hundred dollars per user translates to almost six hundred Egyptian pounds, which can add up. For enterprise licensing, I think the perpetual license option could be more affordable. If it were cheaper, say around five hundred dollars, I would have invested in multiple perpetual licenses long ago. Sometimes, to manage costs, we share accounts among team members or switch access on and off for certain members who aren't actively working on projects. As for additional costs, there are charges for cloud services, which I'm considering because I've already exceeded the free capacity."
"You can move between the tiers from month to month so you are not restricted to one pricing model."
"Visual Paradigm has two models available. One of them is the educational edition, and another is the business edition. For my personal usage, I use the educational version mostly. In a project, my customers have to purchase a license."
"This is an open-sourced solution, it is free to use."
"I rate the pricing a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
24%
Government
11%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Educational Organization
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

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...
What is your primary use case for No Magic MagicDraw?
I deal with DOD lifecycle acquisition sorts of things as some of the main use cases currently, and I expect to continue using it for more than 25 years.
What do you like most about Visual Paradigm?
The solution is the best application for data modeling. It helps to architect business processes. Its best features are pricing and functionality.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Visual Paradigm?
I purchased Visual Paradigm on my own, and it was competitively priced, so I was fine with the pricing.
What needs improvement with Visual Paradigm?
The product can always get better as the industry changes, however, I didn't necessarily feel it was lacking for what I did with it.
 

Also Known As

MagicDraw
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
Adobe, Apple, at&t, Caterpillar, Intel, NASA, Nokia, Toyota
Find out what your peers are saying about No Magic MagicDraw vs. Visual Paradigm and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.