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

OpenText Trading Grid vs SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

OpenText Trading Grid
Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware
12th
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (39th)
SEEBURGER Business Integrat...
Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware
2nd
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
14th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (12th), API Management (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Business-to-Business Middleware category, the mindshare of OpenText Trading Grid is 4.4%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is 10.1%, up from 9.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business-to-Business Middleware Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite10.1%
OpenText Trading Grid4.4%
Other85.5%
Business-to-Business Middleware
 

Featured Reviews

VARUNKUMAR - PeerSpot reviewer
Mgr Value Chain Integration/EDI at a non-tech company with 10,001+ employees
Industry-leading, easy to implement, and has good mapping specification guidelines
The good thing about OpenText is that we have the mapping specification guideline available, which is not there in a solution like SEEBURGER. Whenever you want to take a decision to move away from OpenText, you have already documented your mapping and what your mapping looks like. So you go to the next provider, provide them with that mapping specification, and it'll be very easy for them to develop a new map instead of just taking the data - input data, output data - and then looking for how the data is getting transformed. So you have the mapping spec level which is a very good feature of OpenText, which we do not have in SEEBURGER. It's very hard to move from SEEBURGER. The solution is easy to implement. It's stable and reliable. They are the industry leaders in the integration space.
SS
Senior Software Engineer at HCLTech
Exceptional support and reliability drive optimal data flow and integration
The features of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite that I found most valuable are related to entity flow. We can find the entity flow to be very useful so we can grab the flow accordingly. There is no disturbance in the connections, and it is very clear to check the connection flow with applicable queues. When comparing to other applications, SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is the easiest way to understand the application. I have also worked on the cloud services where SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is moving to cloud. I have worked on cloud services where the mapping part is in the cloud itself, along with the connection setup.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is easy to implement."
"The good thing about OpenText is that we have the mapping specification guideline available, which is not there in a solution like SEEBURGER."
"It's a tremendously powerful solution and it gives us a lot of leverage to get things done quickly."
"When orders come in they go into our ERP system directly, so there is integration there."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) provides significant value in handling such things in an automated way."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) provides us with the solutions we need."
"My overall rating for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is 10 out of 10."
"Mapping Designer provides excellent flexibility."
"SEEBURGER BIS helps us automate processes. When something is manual and we have to fix the data, then it is really complicated. However, when it's automated, we trust it and the process in the system, so we don't have to go back and fix it. For example, we had a problem with a partner sending 17 files every week, but a few times a year, they wouldn't send files during a certain window. We would escalate this with them. Then, when they caught up and sent the files again, they weren't authenticated. We had to fix this situation before it became a nightmare because our financials were impacted. Also, it was really messy. So, I worked with SEEBURGER to have something automated to pick up the files within a certain window and validate them as accurate. If the files come outside of this window, then we have to approve the loading of them."
"SEEBURGER BIS increased our efficiency by at least 30 percent."
 

Cons

"Technical support needs to be better."
"Technical support isn't the greatest. The transparency is less than you sometimes need."
"The ability to bind a mapping to an agreement seems a bit clunky. It would be nice to have a better way of navigating to a map name rather than using a drop down list."
"The connectivity of the Data Distribution Center (DDC) and the repository need improvement."
"We've lost a little bit of that personalization — someone who might know our business more."
"We are a little locked in with understanding the errors that we receive. We are working with their support to prevent these issues when they come into the database. We use a SQL database and believe they can do better when it comes working with large databases. We have had few instances where the system is hanging, which are most likely from the database. We are working with their support to find out the problem and fix their system. We have tried to use their notification system to prevent these issues, but they need to improve their monitoring system."
"The product is not integrated very well with different cloud providers. We did work with the vendor to build a solution for Amazon, but there is no solution for other cloud providers like Google or Azure. The vendor needs to create adapters so that if we have a requirement to transfer data from our data center to another cloud, outside of Amazon, we would be delighted with that."
"The initial setup is not the straightforward. It took couple of months for us to set up."
"Error messages in the main area could be better, but you can say that about any product."
"All the topics we've identified have been placed on the SEEBURGER roadmap already... Among the things we have requested are improvements in the user interface and improvements that would be implemented by completely new modules or improvements in their Cloud Services."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"They need to be more competitively priced. When it comes to training, they need to lower their prices. It shouldn't be so specific. Maybe they should outsource training to another company. From what I can see, their training is pretty expensive, and they don't do anything for free."
"On an annual basis, our support costs, which are based on the licensing, are about £120,000."
"It has a very goofy pricing model in the sense that they have so many components and it's not very clear what components you require to do your work. When you ask for that, you learn that there's a surcharge for them. It's not that you buy a product and you can use all the compatibilities. They have all these different bits and pieces of it and you have to pay extra for all those things."
"There is a standard agreement for the messaging every month. But if we make a change request — a change to a mapping or something like that — then there is a fixed price per hour."
"The pricing and licensing is very competitive."
"I find the pricing expensive. But I know that when we evaluated another company, it was about the same. That just seems to be the market. It's probably not expensive overall."
"Pricing, compared to the tool that we had earlier, is cheaper."
"We pay for a maximum number of setups, then we pay per customer map, and we pay maintenance on each one of those. BIS provides the flexibility to pay as you grow. The price of each customer map is €200 and the hourly rate for maintenance is fairly reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business-to-Business Middleware solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding the pricing of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, I would rate it as 7 out of 10.
What needs improvement with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding areas of improvement for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, the cloud functionality needs enhancement. The cloud interface is currently too cluttered, especially when creating new tran...
What is your primary use case for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
I have worked around 3.5 years with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite ( /products/seeburger-business-integration-suite-reviews ). Currently, I am working with WebMethods. Previously, I worked fo...
 

Also Known As

Trading Grid, GXS Trading Grid
SEEBURGER BIS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Autoliv, Hella, Hutchinson, Michelin
Altis, Autoliv, Cebi, Cofresco, MoneyGram International, Samsonite Europe, VSP Global, BMW Group, OSRAM, Magna, Lavazza
Find out what your peers are saying about Informatica, Seeburger, IBM and others in Business-to-Business Middleware. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.