You have to deal with a minimum of five, even if you want to go and check only a particular logic, making it an area with issues where improvements are required.

Certain shortcomings in the product's UI make it an area where improvements are required. The tool should provide ease of use and flexibility.

I have been using Informatica Cloud Data Integration for four years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

I see that my company faces frequent challenges in the tool when it comes to the area of UI and related to the area of characters. In my company, we have experienced some issues that occur when upgrading the tool.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Enterprise-sized customers can choose Informatica Cloud Data Integration.

The technical support for the solution is helpful, but it takes them time to figure out the issue. The time taken to close the ticket depends on the support that Informatica gets from their backend technical team. It takes a long time to close a ticket. I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

The product's initial setup phase was not difficult.

The product's deployment phase can be carried out by linking a .exe file provided by the solution with your server.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

Against Informatica Cloud Data Integration, I recommend SnapLogic, which is a cheaply priced product. People know about SnapLogic, as it comes with very good features and ease of use.

The feature of the product that I find the most beneficial for data warehousing tasks is the use of the tool for extracting and loading purposes, which depends upon the connector's availability. Many connectors in Informatica are not free or out of the box, and you have to purchase them. The tool has quality connectors.

I haven't used the tool for real-time data analytics, but I have used it in my company for batch-oriented purposes. Data integration will not be supported in real-time in Informatica Cloud Data Integration. For real-time data integration, you have to go with either the application integration or other products like Informatica PowerExchange.

In Informatica Cloud Data Integration, the transformation feature was almost the same as that of Informatica PowerCenter. In Informatica Cloud Data Integration, the transformation features may offer a couple of more functionalities.

In terms of the ease of learning that the product provides, I would say that those who have experience with Informatica PowerCenter can easily adopt Informatica Cloud Data Integration. A person who has worked on Informatica Cloud Data Integration may not be comfortable with Informatica PowerCenter. In terms of ease of use, I consider Informatica PowerCenter to be easier than Informatica Cloud Data Integration.

I rate the ease of use experience attached to the tool a six out of ten.

Only after considering the use cases of people can I recommend the product to them. If a person only wants a product for extraction and loading purposes, then I feel that there are many cheap products in the market that can satisfy their needs. Suppose someone is looking at a tool that offers widespread features, like application integration and real-time functionalities. In that case, all of it comes under Informatica, which can be a good option.

The tool is the most expensive one compared to any of the other products in the market, especially in terms of ETL functionalities or integration features.

My company has integrated SAP, many databases, and APIs into Informatica Cloud Data Integration.

I can see that the performance of the product keeps improving with every new release, especially in the area of job executions, even though the hardware may be the same.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

I use the solution for preparing the data according to the data quality rules.

The mapping and mapplet features are valuable. The product improves data quality. The processes are running smoothly. The interface is good. Data integration is easy.

I use the solution to integrate on-premise and cloud products. There are issues with connectors to cloud applications. The integration process is not easy. The customer experience must be improved. When we implemented it, we did it with the help of Informatica professionals. I would not recommend them as an implementer. They didn't have any experience. It was very hard. The customer experience was not good. It's hard to understand the new features of the HR list. The tool must have more options for connectors. It is hard to connect to some of the applications. The remediation process is not straightforward.

I have been using the solution for one and a half years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a six out of ten. It is a bit complex to scale. We have 20 users.

The technical support is not good. The support team must improve the quality of support.

The product is cloud-based.

We got a 50% discount.

We couldn’t deliver the full project. I will not recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

It is used for our SharePoint data, and it is used for our financial data, so we prepare some kind of data lakes about data. And for a lot of financial things. For example, when somebody has to put the user, like, what we have in your organization. You have a user, and some joint venture partners are there. So, we use it for multiple financial master data. Basically, financial master data, we use it.

We are basically partners, IT partners because a lot of data is being used in multiple applications for Informatica. So, basically, we have partners. It's like Shell. So, it's an end user, but as well as a partner.

It's helpful in integration, and it can be moved around in SharePoint.  So, from the SharePoint View, data integration and reporting, it help a lot in that way.

The speed with which the data should be moved could be improved because of the firewall. It's becoming quite slow. And the integration with Teams or with Microsoft is not so smooth. So these are the areas of improvement. 

So, probably, they might even look for some upgrades or some changes over there. But these are the two key areas that we are facing issues with. One is the data moves a bit slow, and the integration within Microsoft products.

Maintenance is another issue that takes a lot of time and money. It can be a challenge in the long term.

I have been using this solution for six to seven years. 

It is stable, I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. Because of the maintenance issue, we want to scale it up, but we're not able to do so because of the maintenance issue and delayed response.

It breaks down quite often, and it takes time and money to get the issue fixed. These are challenges that need to be addressed from a global perspective, not just from my process.

The support from IBM might not be good, or the IBM people might have to contact Informatica for the solution. That could be a reason. But the resolution takes longer than expected.

There is room for improvement in the support. The response time could be faster. 

Neutral

It is easy to install because our laptops come pre-configured. There were no issues. However, it is not easy to maintain. 

We have a team that IBM handles for maintenance work. If there are issues, we raise a ticket, and they get sorted out, but it takes too long. It is not quick enough. The resolution takes more time than expected. 

We saw an ROI. We have been able to get data from various sources and consolidate it into a data lake, which is helping us in data analytics. This aligns with our company's initiative to implement a data lake strategy and drive digital transformation.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We use the product to define policies and for data discovery management.

It is complicated to establish the lineage in EDC using PowerCenter mappings. We have to do the process manually every time. This particular area needs improvement.

We have been using Informatica Axon for five years.

It is a stable platform. However, we need to raise the ticket even for the smaller issues. There needs to be proper documentation available. They should provide enough information.

We have eight to ten customers for Informatica Axon. It is a scalable product.

The technical support team takes time to complete the debugging process.

The initial setup process is fine, but there are a lot of infrastructure issues. It includes errors on the node cluster for EDC. Deployment is easy, but debugging is time-consuming. Whenever we raise the ticket to the support team, they take two to three days to evaluate the issue.

The licensing price of the product depends on the organization's requirements. It is less costly than Collibra.

I recommend Informatica Axon to others and rate it a seven out of ten.

The primary use case is for data governance, data quality, data lineages, and data cataloging.

It is used by an internal team for data discovery. However, we are not able to provide business area-level access to other users because of data security.

It's a good product, and the features for data quality, data cataloging, and UI are excellent. It has a lot of advantages.

The major points of improvement are stability, integration, and permission to sub-folders or categories of data. If you want to provide access to a particular type of data discovery to a team, it exposes a lot of data points which in turn makes Axon not that useful for them.

Permissions, scalability, and connection with other informatic tools are the main areas that need development. Integration with other tools, such as IDQ, is challenging. The management of data discovery is highly challenging because many data points have identical definitions.

Mostly, this will come under the data security permission level or admin access.

I have been using Axon for a year, but I have been using other solutions from Informatica for five years now. 

I currently use the latest version of Axon.

I would rate the stability a three or four out of ten. It's not loading at all and it keeps on getting down.

I would rate the scalability a six out of ten. There is room for improvement. 

We developed something on IDQ on the data quality side. If there is a huge data or a big workload, it takes a lot of time to run and we don't get the result in Axon. 

There are around 10 to 15 end users using Axon in our organization. 

There is a different team for platform maintenance, management, and deployment. There are around ten people on the team. It's a mix of engineers and developers.

The platform team had some difficulties with admin-level things and keeping Axon up all the time because it's on-premises. 

The solution is expensive.

Not on the governance, but I have used Databricks, Azure Synapse, Oracle, and other services by Azure.

Databricks is my personal favorite because of the scalability and the runtime it takes to load a large amount of data from a data engineering and data science perspective. 

I'll probably look for another solution because it has stability issues. When it's needed, it's usually unavailable.

However, it is a good product the way it's designed. It's a very good product, and it has a lot of features that are required for data governance. It moved all the Excel work to our web page, which can be accessible to everyone. It's a good product, but it needs some improvement.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Data Quality involves quality checks and data profiling. It scans through the data, providing metrics like the number of nulls and unique values. Informatica Data Quality profiles the data.

In my experience, I've specifically worked with a feature called ARS Doctor, which is part of IDQ (Informatica Data Quality). So, in my earlier project, the core functionality of ARS Doctor revolved around address information sourced from the USPS postal service. It does validate the data. This is crucial because customer addresses often contain diverse writing errors. Given the presence of multiple applications, addresses can be inputted or tagged across various systems or enter their address data differently, yet it needs to conform to a standardized format. 

Therefore, each address, even if inputted from distinct systems, undergoes validation to match a single, customizable format. We also have customized settings for these validations.

There's certainly room for improvement. One crucial area is generating detailed reports on file statuses. Presently, this is represented visually, often as graphs or charts. Such reporting could offer comprehensive insights into the areas that demand attention and further scrutiny.

I possess extensive hands-on experience and expertise in Informatica.

I do find Informatica Data Quality is stable. It generally maintains a high level of reliability and stability, making it an asset compliance in various scenarios.

In terms of scalability, you see, it is on the cloud environment, which itself gives the scalable, and flexibility in terms of accommodation of the data. So if we want to scan across the data for the quality and checks, like, not on any sample data. We really want to do this profiling on the checks on a lot of data. So it is very much visible in the cloud environment, which is cloud storage, which is provided by AWS or Azure, or GCP.

Based on my experience and involvement in reported discussions throughout my career, I would definitely give their customer service a high rating. We receive excellent support from Informatica's team, especially during activities like upgrades and other related tasks. 

Positive

When it comes to the initial setup, particularly in a cloud environment, it's primarily license-based. There are various features available, each catering to different needs. The platform can establish connections with various systems based on the connectors it offers. These connectors facilitate integration with different environments. 

When it comes to data quality, it is a license-based model. So, if you procure the necessary licenses, you gain access to the relevant options. It's all about tailoring the solution to the specific requirements of the project.

If the goal is to perform quality checks separately, there's the option to employ dedicated products for that purpose. Alternatively, data quality checks can be integrated into the data integration process. Naturally, data integration involves elements of reconciliation, verification, and quality assessment. The chosen approach hinges on factors such as data volume and the complexity of requirements. If these factors increase, the option to select different products designed for specific tasks becomes viable and can be explored further.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

The solution gives us the visual features on how the quality is because back in few years or back some time ago. So it was, like, always a kind of hidden thing because, as a part of the data governance, we do have a lot of data dumped in the data warehouse. But relaying we have been just relying on the data warehouse. So we didn't know, like, it is really giving us the powerful insight, or it is really giving our quality data because it could be junk or anything. So, in that case, at least this solution definitely gives us the strength with the visualization part, which gives us, "Okay, these are the different types of data it exists and data. These are the different qualities where it can improve the quality." 

I would like to have the solution in one product and technical support needs to be better. 

The product is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Informatica Axon is easy to deploy and takes six months to install. We would need five people for the solution's deployment. 

Informatica Axon is expensive. 

I wouldn't recommend the tool to small companies due to price and integration. I would rate the tool a seven out of ten. 

In my company, we use Informatica Cloud Data Integration because I work in the insurance sector, where we use the tool for data migration from one environment to another. We also use Informatica Cloud Data Integration in scenarios where the clients switch from their legacy system to Informatica Cloud using Azure Synapse, because of which we have to migrate all the data to Azure Synapse.

The most valuable features of the solution are pushdown, optimization, and partitioning, which can be used for frequent data loading, especially when we have a huge data volume in our company.

While my company operates on the cloud, we have seen that Informatica Cloud Data Integration has some performance issues causing it to lag. I feel that Informatica is still in the process of improving its cloud. Sometimes, there are connectivity shoes in the product causing it to have multiple issues, because of which the solution hangs or lags. The product may have issues because they are new to the market and are trying to improve their services.

I have been using Informatica Cloud Data Integration for two years. 

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

The solution can be easily scaled up since we just need to take the aid of some PIM processor and increase the data volume as per what we want.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I have an experience of more than ten years with Informatica PowerCenter.

Informatica Cloud Data Integration's on-premises version is very good, considering the faster performance and efficiency it provides. Informatica Cloud Data Integration's cloud version is also getting enhanced since Informatica has been regularly doing some patching to increase the product's performance. Considering the current scenario, Informatica PowerCenter is a good product, especially its on-premises version.

The deployment doesn't take much time, and only a few minutes are needed to deploy the solution.

I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is the cheapest and ten is the most expensive. The product is a bit expensive.

In the cloud, Informatica has migrated to a different environment in a single platform named IDMC, on which one can have cloud data migration, cloud application integration, data quality, and data governance, making everything combined with a single platform. Earlier in our company, we had to rely on different software or platforms for each functionality, but now we can use a single URL and work on a single platform.

I would like to speak about Informatica Cloud Data Integration's performance, which is too slow but works overall as a tool. To those planning to use Informatica Cloud, I would say that it is the second-best product in the marketplace, and soon it will become the leading product.

On a daily basis, the product has been increasing their overall availability and performance .On a weekly basis, the product gives out some new updates while fixing its old defects. It will be a good product in the coming years. Improvements in the current product will continue for some time.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

Informatica MDM is a multi-domain product for any master data management. We could use it for customer master data management or supplier data. Given the nature of the business, we can apply Informatica MDM to master the core data entities within an organization.

Informatica MDM has a defined data model we can customize with user and developer options. The solution's user interface allows users to work with the master data model. Another feature I like is that the solution can integrate with various data cleansing engines, such as address cleansing or data quality-related packages or functionalities.

From a data or master data management perspective, the solution is pretty evolved. But from a business process automation workflow standpoint, it could be a bit more intuitive, rather than technically complex, such as in workflow alteration using ActiveVOS. The solution also needs adaptive rules elaborating AI/ML technologies.

I have been working with Informatica MDM for ten years now.

The solution is robust and stable enough.

With master data, we don't usually talk about tons of data. There could be a lot of records, but then it's not that huge. Now that Informatica is shifting towards the cloud as part of their software, they would have considered the scalability perspective, which is not too huge. Like transactional databases, we would expect less data there. The solution is mature enough to cater to a wide range of users.

We have a huge dependency on support all the time. If something is required or unclear or doesn't work, we have to raise a ticket and follow a process to resolve it. The turnaround time is long sometimes.

Even for simpler questions, we still have to be put on hold and wait for someone to pick up and respond. Even if the problem is critical, support does not treat it with the same urgency we would anticipate or expect.

Neutral

One would need professional services from Informatica to get MDM installed, and there has to be a contract with professionals all the time after that to manage the data model and any changes to the data. Moreover, there is a huge dependency on their professional services to work with the product in the long-term perspective.

The setup is not complex for professionals, but people without a technical background would not be able to set up the solution by themselves.

Once the installations are complete, there are two aspects to the solution. One is the back-end, which is the model, then setting up integration to load the data and configuring the MDM system to perform its master data capability. The other part is the front end, which is deploying the user interfaces and ensuring the user roles are defined and set up.

When deploying the solution, the whole project team needs to be around because the developers, the users, and everybody on the project team must come together because once it is deployed, it needs to be tested. Maintenance teams would be separate. They need to focus on any minor enhancements to the solution and provide support with any bugs, issues, or questions users might have with the data.

I have heard from customers that the product comes with a huge license cost. Under contractual terms, Informatica does not let us have full control of our own datasets, but that comes down to how the billing and licensing work. The licensing is a bit complex and expensive.

I have experience working with Informatica MDM. However, I have been comparing it against MS MDS to see how each stands. More from a costing perspective, a licensing standpoint, or any roadmap from a product's perspective, for which MS MDS has no plans to expand or evolve to a newer product with more capabilities. That's something I am checking in the background. Given the current landscape in my organization, both tools coexist, but we are trying to see if we need to replace one with the other.

At the moment, Informatica is the market leader within the MDM space, expanding into the latest data integration and management advancements. I don't see MS MDS in these areas. But then again, MS MDS has been treated as a legacy system within the organization, and we're trying to find a roadmap to replace it with Informatica by understanding what it offers comparatively.

The solution is pretty evolved from an MDM perspective, and it seamlessly integrates with its product suite.

We work with the on-prem version. We have seen the cloud version, but we're not there yet because it takes a long time to onboard all the businesses onto the cloud. The cloud version is still at a proof of concept stage.

Before purchasing the solution, the user must understand the licensing and cost structure, as well as their professional support. All these aspects are important on an ongoing basis. Depending on the wide suite of products they offer, it's best to understand which products would suffice the business needs rather than having to roll out a full-blown MDM solution, which is not the case with all the clients.

I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We use Informatica Axon for MDM purposes.

The most valuable feature of Informatica Axon is that it is flexible and user-friendly.

Informatica Axon needs more integration connectors so that it can connect to systems and different kinds of datasets.

I have been using Informatica Axon for two years.

I rate Informatica Axon an eight out of ten for stability.

Ten engineers are using Informatica Axon in our organization. I rate Informatica Axon an eight out of ten for scalability.

Informatica Axon's installation, configuration, and user access take two to three days.

Informatica Axon eliminates all MDM-related problems quickly.

Informatica Axon is a costly solution. I rate Informatica Axon a four out of ten for its pricing.

I am using the latest version of Informatica Axon. I recommend Informatica Axon to users as it is a good and flexible tool that gets the work done.

Overall, I rate Informatica Axon a seven out of ten.