In our comparison of GoodData vs. IBM Planning Analytics, IBM Planning Analytics is the best option with a higher overall Wheelhouse Score. Wheelhouse Score uses a combination of feature and pricing comparison data, average user ratings, and editorial reviews to score software vendors on a scale of 1-10.
N/A
N/A
Good Data is a quality database for people
The data is incredibly helpful for people to learn and use and conducting research, finding the data is very easy and quick.
At times data type is restricted and insufficient data is acquired by this software, some data are not very proficient for research.
Experience in building complex models: The user has successfully built complex models in TM1 for both management and statutory accounts. They have applied TM1 in diverse areas such as property valuations, ship building project costing, airline route profitability, currency conversion, activity-based costing, and public finance initiative scenario comparison.
Real-time data consolidation: TM1 allows for real-time consolidation of data, enabling users to see the immediate impact of changes made to budget figures at different levels of the hierarchy. Calculations defined in TM1's rules language can be applied to related values, ensuring accurate and up-to-date results.
Limitations of Planning Analytics Workbench (PAW): The user mentions that PAW may not match the capabilities of Power BI when it comes to dashboarding. However, TM1's modeling and planning capabilities are considered superior to those of Power BI.
I recommend GoodData as an excellent solution for data visualizations, particularly for those steering away from in-house development. While customization may have its limits, the platform fulfills our needs efficiently.
Empowerment of product managers to effect changes swiftly. The ability to make alterations without a constant reliance on engineers streamlines our workflow, freeing up resources for strategic roadmap planning. The standardized design ensures uniformity, mitigating the risks associated with disparate in-house UIs.
Although manageable, there exists a learning curve for GoodData. Challenges arise in combining datasets or achieving specific design customizations, aligning with the platform's designated use case.
Experience in building complex models: The user has successfully built complex models in TM1 for both management and statutory accounts. They have applied TM1 in diverse areas such as property valuations, ship building project costing, airline route profitability, currency conversion, activity-based costing, and public finance initiative scenario comparison.
Real-time data consolidation: TM1 allows for real-time consolidation of data, enabling users to see the immediate impact of changes made to budget figures at different levels of the hierarchy. Calculations defined in TM1's rules language can be applied to related values, ensuring accurate and up-to-date results.
Limitations of Planning Analytics Workbench (PAW): The user mentions that PAW may not match the capabilities of Power BI when it comes to dashboarding. However, TM1's modeling and planning capabilities are considered superior to those of Power BI.
Good Data is a quality database for people
The data is incredibly helpful for people to learn and use and conducting research, finding the data is very easy and quick.
At times data type is restricted and insufficient data is acquired by this software, some data are not very proficient for research.
I recommend GoodData as an excellent solution for data visualizations, particularly for those steering away from in-house development. While customization may have its limits, the platform fulfills our needs efficiently.
Empowerment of product managers to effect changes swiftly. The ability to make alterations without a constant reliance on engineers streamlines our workflow, freeing up resources for strategic roadmap planning. The standardized design ensures uniformity, mitigating the risks associated with disparate in-house UIs.
Although manageable, there exists a learning curve for GoodData. Challenges arise in combining datasets or achieving specific design customizations, aligning with the platform's designated use case.
Experience in building complex models: The user has successfully built complex models in TM1 for both management and statutory accounts. They have applied TM1 in diverse areas such as property valuations, ship building project costing, airline route profitability, currency conversion, activity-based costing, and public finance initiative scenario comparison.
Real-time data consolidation: TM1 allows for real-time consolidation of data, enabling users to see the immediate impact of changes made to budget figures at different levels of the hierarchy. Calculations defined in TM1's rules language can be applied to related values, ensuring accurate and up-to-date results.
Limitations of Planning Analytics Workbench (PAW): The user mentions that PAW may not match the capabilities of Power BI when it comes to dashboarding. However, TM1's modeling and planning capabilities are considered superior to those of Power BI.
Experience in building complex models: The user has successfully built complex models in TM1 for both management and statutory accounts. They have applied TM1 in diverse areas such as property valuations, ship building project costing, airline route profitability, currency conversion, activity-based costing, and public finance initiative scenario comparison.
Real-time data consolidation: TM1 allows for real-time consolidation of data, enabling users to see the immediate impact of changes made to budget figures at different levels of the hierarchy. Calculations defined in TM1's rules language can be applied to related values, ensuring accurate and up-to-date results.
Limitations of Planning Analytics Workbench (PAW): The user mentions that PAW may not match the capabilities of Power BI when it comes to dashboarding. However, TM1's modeling and planning capabilities are considered superior to those of Power BI.
Add suggested to comparison
In our rating and review comparison of GoodData vs. IBM Planning Analytics, IBM Planning Analytics has 31 user reviews and GoodData has 15. The average star rating for IBM Planning Analytics is 4.35 while GoodData has an average rating of 3.73. IBM Planning Analytics has more positive reviews than GoodData. Comparing GoodData vs. IBM Planning Analytics reviews, IBM Planning Analytics has stronger overall reviews.
GoodData vs. IBM Planning Analytics both offer a strong set of features and functionality including Data Management, Data Migration, Report Management, Reporting & Analytics, Drag-and-Drop Builders/Designers, Layout Types, Chart Types, Customizable Items, Appointments/Scheduling, Reminders/Alerts, Systems/Administrative, Identity and Access Management (IAM), Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, Supported Technologies. In our feature comparison of GoodData vs. IBM Planning Analytics, IBM Planning Analytics offers more of the most popular features and tools than GoodData.
In our pricing comparison of GoodData vs. IBM Planning Analytics, IBM Planning Analytics's pricing starts at 0/month and is more affordable compared to IBM Planning Analytics's starting cost of 0/month.
Our comparison of GoodData vs. IBM Planning Analytics shows that IBM Planning Analytics scores higher in usability for meets requirements. GoodData scores higher in ease of use, setup & support, quality of support, ease of admin, but IBM Planning Analytics has the best scores overall for system usability.
Get your personalized recommendations now.
