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

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect vs UNICOM System Architect 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

Sparx Systems Enterprise Ar...
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (5th)
UNICOM System Architect
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
24th
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is 9.3%, down from 14.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UNICOM System Architect is 1.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect9.3%
UNICOM System Architect1.4%
Other89.3%
Enterprise Architecture Management
 

Featured Reviews

Milan Sterba - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Enterprise Architect at Deepview S.r.o.
Efficient documentation generation through organized model structure with a good price-performance ratio
Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward. Although it's a powerful product with plenty of features, it's not easy for even experienced users to find their way without guidance. This is not the most user-friendly solution.
reviewer1261290 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at a government with 10,001+ employees
Useful for creating build-outs and architecture views, but requires a publisher add-on for some detailed reports
I don't use the tool or know a lot. It is going to have some shortcomings. When it comes down to publishing, we just found out this week that they actually have a publisher add-on. So, what we were trying to publish was not giving a detailed report about the architecture, views, etc. I just wish they had sent these to UNICOM and contacted them about add-on features for the publishing part of the tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect supports multiple modeling languages like ArchiMate for database design, software lifecycle visualization, and team management."
"Sparx offers good flexibility."
"There are a lot of features in Enterprise Architect. It allows us to take on a lot of tasks."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is very flexible and it is simple to define the metamodel. Additionally, it is lightweight on resources."
"I like that there is support for software patterns."
"The profiles and ready-made templates are an extremely helpful feature. This is one of the biggest features that I find very useful in Sparx."
"The product offers very good support for all mainstream modeling notations and architectural frameworks."
"The solution allows us to quickly present designs and concepts to customers and get their feedback, thereby moving the project forward step by step."
"It is useful for creating build-outs and architecture views and for publishing reports and stuff like that for different programs."
"It has good end-to-end metamodel interrelationships."
 

Cons

"This solution should have better ease of use for the uninitiated."
"Using EA involves a steep learning curve if you want to understand its capabilities and functionality."
"The templates for documentation should be enhanced to include complex documents such as template RFP, or Non functional requirements template."
"I would like the system to more "intellectually" build a scheme, place icons, and connect lines on the schemes."
"It took me a while to figure out how to use the report generation features effectively. So, it would be really nice if they had a way to make that a little bit more interactive and a little bit more straightforward."
"The UI could be improved and made a little bit more presentable."
"Its best features are not intuitive or easy to learn. Most companies I have worked with, when I see what they are doing with it , are not using more than 5% of what they could and should be doing with it."
"There used to be that feature in ArchiMate Modeling of Enterprise Architect called inherited relationships. Now it's gone."
"They need to add reports that show the enterprise architecture perspectives, and the dashboards should be comfortable for the senior enterprise architects so that they can view the complete landscape."
"I don't use the tool or know a lot. It is going to have some shortcomings. When it comes down to publishing, we just found out this week that they actually have a publisher add-on. So, what we were trying to publish was not giving a detailed report about the architecture, views, etc. I just wish they had sent these to UNICOM and contacted them about add-on features for the publishing part of the tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The Corporate Edition, or one of the bundles, is the way to go."
"Pricing and licensing is very attractive, simple, and straightforward."
"It's affordable. The only additional cost that we haven't yet figured out is the floating license. If you buy a floating license, you have to have a license management server, which comes at an additional cost that's not discussed. So, we haven't yet used the floating license. That’s because I haven't had a chance to figure that out."
"The license for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is paid yearly, but I don't handle that area. It's good for its price, so I'm rating it a five out of five, but I'm not using it much. I also don't have information regarding additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees."
"The license I use is on-premise. We haven't gone to the cloud where we have to pay monthly or something like that. Sparx is cheaper than most similar tools."
"This product has a paid license, with a yearly subscription option."
"I think our license costs roughly $1,000 a year, but I could be wrong."
"It is cheap."
"I don't remember the price. It is a different cost for just buying it, and then you have a maintenance cost, which you need to renew every year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business38
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise58
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
The stability has been good and satisfactory. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
One of the reasons many public sector institutions in the Czech Republic use it is that it provides a very good price-performance ratio. While it might be cumbersome to learn, it still delivers exc...
What needs improvement with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect?
Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward. Although it's a powerful product with plenty of features, it's not ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

Information not available
 

Sample Customers

OmniLink
Apple, Facebook, Google, HSBC, PayPal
Find out what your peers are saying about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect vs. UNICOM System Architect and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.