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

Palantir Foundry vs SAP Data Hub [EOL] 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

Palantir Foundry
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (2nd), IT Operations Analytics (4th), Supply Chain Analytics (1st), Cloud Data Integration (4th), Data Migration Appliances (2nd), Data Management Platforms (DMP) (1st), Data and Analytics Service Providers (1st)
SAP Data Hub [EOL]
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2846265 - PeerSpot reviewer
PALANTIR DATA ENGINEER at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Unified healthcare pipelines have improved data trust and accelerated operational decisions
One challenge regarding how Palantir Foundry can be improved is the learning curve. Foundry has a very broad ecosystem with Ontology, Pipeline Builder, Code Repositories, and AI integrations. For new engineers or business users onboarding, it can take time, especially if they are coming from more traditional data platforms. Better documentation, simplified onboarding paths, and more beginner-friendly examples would help accelerate adoption. Another area is debugging complexity. While lineage and monitoring are strong features, troubleshooting deeply interconnected pipelines can still become difficult in a large enterprise environment. Sometimes error logs and pipeline failure messages could be more descriptive or developer-friendly, especially for distributed PySpark jobs. Another pain point is customization limitations in certain UI-driven components. While low-code tools are great for rapid development, highly customized workflows sometimes still require engineering workarounds or deeper technical implementation. The platform is extremely capable, but improvements around usability, debugging experience, DevOps flexibility, and ecosystem openness would make it even more effective for enterprise engineering teams.
VM
GTM Lead at Capgemini
The solution is seamless, but the database sometimes leads to confusion
We used to have multiple different kinds of databases, which internally, had different compliance levels. Retention management is very different now. If the policy is live and the claim has been completed, I couldn't archive the claim. I needed to keep a reference integrity of that claim and understand which policy paid out the claim. With this solution, the policy came in six months ago and qualified for archiving. The claim had been paid and in every environment, the claim had been closed, including the reporting system, the claims system, etc. With the payment set gateway, I can just go and archive. But, we had a hard time during this process. I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Palantir Foundry is the future of development because it embeds multiple AI models, and the AI enabling feature is very fast and easy."
"Palantir Foundry is not just a data platform; it actually connects data engineering, analytics, operations, and decision-making all into one ecosystem."
"Both time and money were saved since a project that would usually take six months was completed in two to three months."
"Based on my huge experience with Palantir Foundry, I find that starting from the data connection to the end user application, there is a tool for everyone."
"Palantir Foundry has positively impacted my organization with over 200 projects completed efficiently and effectively, and they are very complex projects."
"Great features available in one tool."
"Palantir Foundry has dramatically helped us in terms of project costing because earlier we had our own React developers team from offshore, and now with the AIP capabilities launched on the platform, we have completely avoided the need for a dedicated team, which has been very helpful in terms of cost management and reducing team size."
"Foundry's data visualization is fantastic."
"They lead in terms of business functions, and no other solution has business functions already implemented to perform business analysis, with a lot of prebuilt business functions for machine learning and orchestration that we can use directly to get an analysis out from the existing enterprise data."
"Its connection to on-premise products is the most valuable. We mostly use the on-premise connection, which is seamless. This is what we prefer in this solution over other solutions. We are using it the most for the orchestration where the data is coming from different categories. Its other features are very much similar to what they are giving us in open source. Their push-down approach is the most advantageous, where they push most of the processing on to the same data source. This means that they have a serverless kind of thing, and they don't process the data inside a product such as Data Hub. They process the data from where the data is coming out. If it is coming from HANA, to capture the data or process it for analytics, orchestration, or management, they go to the HANA database and give it out. They don't process it on Data Hub. This push-down approach increases the processing speed a little bit because the data is processed where it is sitting. That's the best part and an advantage. I have used another product where they used to capture the data first and then they used to process it and give it. In Data Hub, it is in reverse. They process it first and give it, and then they put their own manipulations. They lead in terms of business functions. No other solution has business functions already implemented to perform business analysis. They have a lot of prebuilt business functions for machine learning and orchestration, which we can use directly to get an analysis out from the existing data. Most of the data is sitting as enterprise data there. That's a major advantage that they have."
"The most valuable feature is the S/4HANA 1909 On-Premise"
"Having this solution enables us to approach our clients to upgrade their databases, and we upgrade them according to their business requirements."
"SAP is one of the most seamless ERPs that have integrated SAP archiving within Excel. I have not seen this with any other database."
 

Cons

"Palantir Foundry is very accurate, but I would have doubts about its reliability because there have been instances in my current job where we experience untimely application downtime, which has impacted the business significantly, so I think reliability needs improvement."
"I want to say that Palantir Foundry is quite expensive; it is not so easy for budget review and budget transformation of the company, which is quite expensive."
"However, a disadvantage is the challenge of connecting data to and from Palantir, which requires coordination with data engineers."
"The solution's visualization and analysis could be improved."
"The major hindrance with Palantir Foundry is that being a very closed product, the cost optimization and costing are not exposed to the end users."
"Cost of this solution is quite high."
"As a developer, I find the limited documentation and less resource availability restrictive compared to other options such as AWS."
"However, Palantir Foundry's license fees comparative to others are quite high."
"In 2018, connecting it to outside sources, such as IoT products or IoT-enabled big data Hadoop, was a little complex. It was not smooth at the beginning. It was unstable. It took a lot of time for the initial data load. Sometimes, the connection broke, and we had to restart the process, which was a major issue, but they might have improved it now. It is very smooth with SAP HANA on-premise system, SAP Cloud Platform, and SAP Analytics Cloud. It could be because these are their own products, and they know how to integrate them. With Hadoop, they might have used open-source technologies, and that's why it was breaking at that time. They are providing less embedded integration because they want us to use their other products. For example, they don't want to go and remove SAP Analytics Cloud and put everything in Data Hub. They want us to use SAP Analytics Cloud somewhere else and not inside the Data Hub. On the integration part, it lacks real-time analytics, and it is slow. They should embed the SAP Analytics Cloud inside Data Hub or support some kind of analysis. They do provide some analysis, but it is not extensive. They are moreover open source. So, we need a lot of developers or data scientists to go in and implement Python algorithms. It would be better if they can provide their own existing algorithms and give some connections and drop-down menus to go and just configure those. It will make things really quick by increasing the embedded integrations. It will also improve the process efficiency and processing power. Its performance needs improvement. It is a little slow. It is not the best in the market, and there are other products that are much better than this. In terms of technology and performance, it is a little slow as compared to Microsoft and other data orchestration products. I haven't used other products, but I have read about those products, their settings, and the milliseconds that they do. In Azure Purview, they say that they can copy, manage, or transform the data within milliseconds. They say that they can transform 100 gigabytes of data within three to five seconds, which is something SAP cannot do. It generally takes a lot of time to process that much amount of data. However, I have never tested out Azure."
"The company has everything offshore."
"Its performance needs improvement. It is a little slow. It is not the best in the market, and there are other products that are much better than this."
"Nowadays there are some inconsistencies in data bases, however, they upgrade and release the versions to market."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Palantir Foundry has different pricing models that can be negotiated."
"It's expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"Palantir Foundry is an expensive solution."
"The Cloud is very expensive, but SAP HANA previous service is okay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise51
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Palantir Foundry?
The Workshop application could be improved because it is not very customizable, but it is still very strong. We also have the React OSK apps, but it does not allow the inbuilt applications such as ...
What is your primary use case for Palantir Foundry?
My main use case for Palantir Foundry is to solve business problems, such as in healthcare. I also worked on a project for a law firm where thousands of PDFs were coming in, and we needed to check ...
What advice do you have for others considering Palantir Foundry?
I believe they should get started by completing all the free certificates, then they could apply to the paid certificates to get a master of Palantir Foundry, solve some real use cases, do examples...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Merck KGaA, Airbus, Ferrari,United States Intelligence Community, United States Department of Defense
Kaeser Kompressoren, HARTMANN
Find out what your peers are saying about Informatica, Palantir, Microsoft and others in Data Integration. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.