CIOPages
Data & AnalyticsHigh Complexity

Buyer's Guide: Master Data Management (MDM)

Evaluate Informatica, SAP MDG, Reltio, Stibo, Semarchy, Profisee, IBM, EBX, Ataccama, and Syndigo against the master-data problem you actually have — customer, product, or multidomain — with governance and write-back, not match rates, as the deciding criterion.

16 min read 10 vendors evaluated Updated June 2026
Section 1

Executive Summary

Master Data Management (MDM) solves the matching problem to create a golden record, but often fails due to governance issues. The choice of MDM platform, from vendors like Informatica, Reltio, Profisee, and Semarchy, depends on its ability to make stewardship and data ownership workable for the business, rather than just its matching and survivorship capabilities.

MDM is sold as a matching problem and lost as a governance one — the golden record only matters if the business owns it and the systems use it.

Informatica, Reltio, Profisee, and Semarchy anchor a market where the technology is rarely the reason MDM fails — governance is. Matching and survivorship are largely solved; the differentiator is whether a platform makes stewardship, data ownership, and golden-record rules workable for the business, or buries them in a tool only specialists can run.

This guide provides a vendor-neutral evaluation framework for 10 leading platforms, weighing matching, governance, and domain flexibility so you can choose against the master-data problem you actually have — customer, product, or multi-domain — rather than a generic capability grid.


Section 2

Why Master Data Management (MDM) Matters for Enterprise Strategy

Master Data Management (MDM) matters because it ensures downstream systems like customer 360, product catalogs, and AI agents operate with accurate, governed data. The right MDM platform defines data ownership, resolves disputes, and ensures a single governed record reaches CRM, ERP, and data warehouses, preventing data inconsistencies and expensive, unused master data.

MDM selection should start with the domains and the operating model, not the matching engine. What separates platforms is how they handle multi-domain data, whether stewardship workflows fit the business users who must own the data, and how the golden record flows back into the systems that consume it — because unused master data is just an expensive side database.

🎯
Strategic Impact
Master data has become the dependency that decides whether everything downstream works: a customer 360, a clean product catalog across channels, accurate spend analytics, and now AI agents that are only as trustworthy as the entities they reason over. The platform you pick sets who owns each domain, how disputes get resolved, and whether one governed record reaches the CRM, ERP, and data warehouse — or whether each keeps its own version and the “single source of truth” quietly forks again.

The market is shifting toward cloud-native, multi-domain MDM with AI-assisted matching and a closer relationship to data governance and catalogs. Weigh each vendor on how it fits your broader data fabric, not just how well it dedupes a single customer table in a demo.


Section 3

Should you build or buy Master Data Management (MDM)?

You should almost always buy, not build, an MDM solution, as hand-coding core features like survivorship and match tuning is a multi-year detour. The real decision is architectural, focusing on mastering style, whether to lead with a customer/party or product/PIM hub, and the operating model (e.g., cloud-native like Reltio, or incumbent suites like SAP MDG). Frame the choice around the domains you must govern.

MDM is almost never a true build-vs-buy question — hand-coding survivorship, match tuning, lineage, and a stewardship UI is a multi-year detour that recreates what mature platforms already ship. The real decision is architectural: which mastering style fits each domain (registry, consolidation hub, or coexistence with write-back), whether you lead with a customer/party hub or a product/PIM-led one, and whether a cloud-native service or an incumbent suite aligned to your ERP is the better operating model. Frame the choice around the domains you must govern and where the golden record has to land, not the demo dataset.

Your Situation Recommended Path Rationale
Customer/party 360 feeding CRM, marketing, and real-time apps Cloud-native, API-first hub (Reltio-class) Real-time consumption and relationship/graph context matter more than batch throughput; an API-first hub serves trusted profiles to operational and AI workloads without a nightly rebuild.
Product data across channels in retail, manufacturing, or CPG Product/PIM-led MDM (Stibo, Syndigo) Merchandising attributes, taxonomy, digital assets, and supplier-to-channel syndication outweigh party matching; a PIM-led hub is built for catalog depth and content distribution.
SAP S/4HANA-centric estate governing material and business-partner data SAP MDG, co-deployed or as a hub Native reuse of the S/4HANA data model, validations, and Fiori security beats bolting an external hub onto SAP; the golden record stays close to the operational core.
Microsoft/Azure data estate with a lean team Azure-aligned platform (Profisee) Tight Purview, Fabric, and Entra ID integration and a low-code model shorten time-to-value and fit a small stewardship team replacing the retired Microsoft MDS.
Many domains, governance-heavy, fast iteration wanted Model-driven multidomain hub (Semarchy, EBX) Model-driven platforms generate stewardship apps and APIs from the data model, so adding a domain is configuration, not a new project — ideal when reference data and hierarchies sprawl.
⚠️
Common Pitfall
The most common MDM mistake is running it as a technology project. Without business data owners, funded stewardship, and a clear scope, even the best engine produces golden records no one trusts or uses. Start with one high-value domain, prove governance works, and expand — rather than boiling the ocean across every entity at once.

Section 4

How do you evaluate Master Data Management (MDM)?

To evaluate Master Data Management (MDM), prioritize how naturally stewardship fits the business, platform flexibility across multiple domains like customer or product, and if the golden record flows back to consuming systems. Key criteria include matching, survivorship, governance, integration, and deployment. Focus your POC on the "round trip": load messy real records, have a business steward resolve conflicts in the UI, and confirm the corrected golden record writes back cleanly to a downstream system.

Weight these domains against your own data problem and operating model. For most enterprises the decisive factors are no longer raw match accuracy — which most platforms handle — but how naturally stewardship fits the business, how flexibly the platform models multiple domains, and whether the golden record actually flows back to the systems that consume it.

Capability Domain Weight What to Evaluate
Matching, Survivorship & Golden-Record Quality 25% Deterministic, probabilistic, and AI/ML matching; tunable and explainable match rules; survivorship and trust-scoring; manual merge/unmerge and re-linking; cross-domain entity resolution and persistent IDs
Domain Model & Multidomain Flexibility 20% Customer/party, product/PIM, supplier, location, reference data, and hierarchies; whether new domains and attributes are configuration vs. custom build; relationship/graph modeling and prebuilt domain accelerators
Governance, Stewardship & Workflow 20% Business-friendly stewardship UI, configurable approval workflows, data ownership and roles, audit trail and history, data-quality rules and remediation, and a glossary/catalog tie-in
Integration & Write-Back / Syndication 15% Prebuilt connectors to CRM, ERP, and the warehouse/lakehouse; real-time and batch APIs; event/streaming and CDC; bidirectional write-back to source systems; and product-content syndication where relevant
Deployment, Scale & Operating Model 10% SaaS vs. self-managed vs. hybrid; data residency and isolation; performance at your record volume and concurrency; environment and release management; and the skills the platform demands to run
AI Automation & Roadmap 10% LLM-assisted matching and data-product creation, natural-language stewardship and query, anomaly and duplicate detection, agent/MCP access to trusted entities, and a credible, shipping (not slideware) roadmap
💡
Evaluation Tip
Don’t score the match — score the round trip. In the POC, load your messiest real records (duplicates, languages, legal-entity tangles), have an actual business steward — not the vendor’s engineer — resolve a survivorship conflict in the UI, then push the corrected golden record back into a downstream system and confirm it arrived intact. The platform whose stewards work unaided and whose write-back lands cleanly, not the one with the highest demo match rate, leads your shortlist.

Section 5

Which vendors lead in Master Data Management (MDM)?

Consider vendors like Informatica, SAP, Reltio, Stibo Systems, and Semarchy, categorized by your dominant problem. Informatica and Reltio recently underwent acquisitions by Salesforce and SAP, respectively, making roadmap continuity and vendor independence key selection criteria. Cut the field by the domain you must master and the operating model you can sustain, weighing deployment style and AI roadmap.

10 vendors evaluated — positioning and best fit at a glance
Vendor Positioning Best for
Informatica MDM Leader — Multidomain Large enterprises wanting one broad, AI-augmented multidomain platform unified with governance and integration — and comfortable with the Salesforce trajectory
SAP Master Data Governance Leader — SAP-Centric Enterprises standardized on SAP S/4HANA or SAP ERP that need governed golden records native to their operational core
Reltio Leader — Cloud-Native Enterprises wanting cloud-native, real-time, multidomain Customer 360 with AI-ready trusted data — and able to commit to SaaS
Stibo Systems Leader — Product/PIM Retail, manufacturing, and CPG enterprises whose hardest problem is governed product data and multi-channel syndication
Semarchy Strong — Model-Driven Organizations wanting fast, flexible multidomain MDM unified with data integration and quality on one model-driven platform
Profisee Strong — Microsoft-Aligned Mid-market-to-enterprise organizations standardized on Microsoft and Azure, especially Fabric and Purview or replacing Microsoft MDS
IBM Master Data Management Strong — Data Fabric Enterprises invested in IBM Cloud Pak for Data and watsonx that need AI-powered multidomain MDM with strong customer/party resolution
EBX (Cloud Software Group) Strong — Reference Data Enterprises needing governance-rich, model-driven multidomain MDM with deep reference-data and hierarchy management
Ataccama Challenger — Unified Data Trust Organizations wanting a single AI-augmented data-trust platform led by best-in-class data quality and governance, with MDM as one module
Syndigo Specialist — Product Syndication Manufacturers, brands, and retailers whose core need is governed product data plus large-scale content syndication to channels

The market sorts into four camps that most shortlists end up comparing across, not within. Broad multidomain suites (Informatica, IBM) master any domain and bundle governance and integration; ERP-aligned governance (SAP MDG) keeps master data native to the operational core; cloud-native challengers (Reltio, Semarchy) lead on real-time, API-first, model-driven delivery; and product/PIM-led platforms (Stibo, Syndigo) optimize for catalog depth and channel syndication. A wave of 2025–2026 consolidation has reshaped the field — Informatica is now a Salesforce company and Reltio is now a SAP company — so roadmap continuity and vendor independence are now first-order selection criteria, not footnotes.

Cut the field by the domain you must master and the operating model you can sustain. Lead with the camp that fits your dominant problem — party vs. product vs. SAP-native vs. governance-heavy multidomain — then weigh deployment style and AI roadmap. The profiles below name real products and call out honest trade-offs so you can build a shortlist that reflects your estate rather than the loudest brand.

Informatica MDM

Leader — Multidomain

Nothing else here covers more multidomain ground, or covers it with more maturity: prebuilt Customer 360, Product 360, Supplier 360, and Reference 360 apps on IDMC, sharing one fabric with data integration, quality, and the Cloud Data Governance & Catalog, with the CLAIRE AI engine driving match and rule recommendations and CLAIRE Copilot and agentic capabilities extending that across MDM and PIM — and all four implementation styles supported, so you are not locked into one. It is now a Salesforce company, the acquisition having closed in late 2025, which raises real questions about long-term roadmap, packaging, and vendor-neutrality for non-Salesforce shops. Legacy on-prem Multidomain MDM and PowerCenter estates face a genuine re-platform to SaaS rather than a lift-and-shift, and the breadth is correspondingly heavy to implement and administer.

SAP Master Data Governance

Leader — SAP-Centric

If you run S/4HANA, this is hard to argue against: MDG reuses the S/4HANA data model, validations, mapping, and Fiori security, and combines consolidation — load, standardize, match, survive — with workflow-driven central governance for authoring, co-deployed on the same S/4HANA system or run as a dedicated hub, with a cloud edition on BTP for federated governance and Joule generative-AI assistance embedded for search, create, and change. The data-model payoff accrues only to SAP shops; governing heterogeneous non-SAP data is higher-effort and leans on APIs and middleware. The SaaS cloud edition is still maturing and scoped to limited domains, business partner first, so it does not yet replace MDG on S/4HANA, and expect substantial configuration, a separate license, and specialized SAP skills.

Reltio

Leader — Cloud-Native

Cloud-native and real-time is the design, and it holds up: a multitenant SaaS platform built API-first around a connected data graph, mastering multidomain entities and their relationships in real time for operational and AI consumption, with LLM-assisted AI/ML matching that needs less hand-tuned rule work, agentic access and natural-language interaction, and Velocity packs and prebuilt industry models for fast deployment — particularly strong in life sciences, financial services, healthcare, and insurance. It is now an SAP company, the acquisition having closed in 2026, and it is set to anchor master data in SAP Business Data Cloud; SAP says it stays available standalone for the foreseeable future, but that is a current commitment rather than a permanent guarantee, and future SAP alignment is the central diligence question for non-SAP shops. It is SaaS-only by design, a hard stop for air-gapped or strict data-residency mandates, sits at the premium end, and is a customer and party platform rather than a deep PIM.

Stibo Systems

Leader — Product/PIM

Product data is the hardest problem it solves, and it has the deepest heritage there: the STEP platform pairs rich PIM — taxonomy, attributes, digital assets, and channel syndication — with customer, supplier, and location domains on one governed foundation, on a multitenant SaaS architecture that scales to very large catalogs, and it is a recognized fit for retail, manufacturing, and CPG. The center of gravity is product and supply-chain data, so teams whose primary problem is real-time customer and party resolution may find dedicated party hubs stronger. Implementations are enterprise-scale undertakings that reward experienced partners, the rich data modeling has a learning curve, and customer-domain depth is worth validating specifically if that is your lead use case.

Semarchy

Strong — Model-Driven

Speed of delivery is the reputation, and the architecture explains it: xDM is a model-driven, single-codebase platform unifying MDM, reference data, data quality, and the xDI integration suite, so modeling the data and rules auto-generates stewardship apps, workflows, and APIs, with all four mastering styles supported and deployment as managed SaaS, self-hosted, or even a Snowflake Native App, plus DataOps tooling and an AI design copilot. It is a smaller vendor with lower brand awareness than Informatica, SAP, or IBM, which means a leaner partner and accelerator ecosystem. Deep merchandising, syndication, or DAM needs may exceed its product-domain depth, the model-driven approach rewards modeling discipline, and reviewers note gaps in out-of-the-box reporting and some workflow flexibility.

Profisee

Strong — Microsoft-Aligned

No MDM vendor is closer to Microsoft: bidirectional Purview integration, a new Fabric-native workload mirroring golden records into OneLake, and ADF, Synapse, Entra ID, and Power BI ties position it as the natural successor to the retired Microsoft MDS, on a schema-agnostic, low-code platform whose explainable matching and AI stewardship assistant deliver fast, predictable time-to-value for lean teams. Those differentiators are Azure-native, so the value thins in AWS- or GCP-only estates — self-hosting is supported, but managed SaaS is Azure-centric. Being schema-agnostic also means fewer deep prebuilt domain models, so complex or PIM-rich use cases need developer effort, it is a focused specialist rather than a sprawling suite, and reviews note some setup and upgrade friction.

IBM Master Data Management

Strong — Data Fabric

Party resolution is the strength, and the pedigree is real: built on the probabilistic-matching heritage of the Initiate and InfoSphere lineage, IBM’s cloud-native MDM on Match 360 within Cloud Pak for Data delivers industrial-strength customer and party entity resolution with tunable probabilistic, deterministic, and hybrid matching, running as a containerized service on Cloud Pak for Data and OpenShift or fully managed, sharing governance and lineage with IBM Knowledge Catalog and feeding mastered entities to watsonx and the lakehouse. Two products carry overlapping MDM names — the modern cloud-native line and legacy InfoSphere MDM — so be explicit about which you license and plan the migration. Full value ties to the Cloud Pak for Data and OpenShift stack, a heavier platform commitment than standalone SaaS MDM, and reviewers praise the vision but consistently flag implementation complexity.

EBX (Cloud Software Group)

Strong — Reference Data

Reference data and hierarchies are the recognized differentiator: code lists, classifications, mappings, and multi-level hierarchies, with first-class dataspaces for branch and merge, snapshots, and full audit history, on a model-driven multidomain hub where defining the data model generates the authoring UI, stewardship screens, and workflows on the fly, deployable on-prem, as SaaS, or containerized on Kubernetes — and recently carved out as the standalone ON EBX business unit, honoring its Orchestra Networks origin. Matching and large-scale cleansing are a relative weakness against Informatica and IBM: the strength here is governance, modeling, and reference data, not heavy probabilistic resolution. The partner and skills ecosystem is smaller, customization leans Java-heavy, reviewers note record-based processing and latency at very high volumes, and as a recently restructured, PE-owned unit it needs post-spin support continuity and the AI roadmap validated.

Ataccama

Challenger — Unified Data Trust

Quality before mastering is the distinctive sequence: Ataccama ONE combines data quality, catalog, governance, lineage, observability, reference data, and MDM on one in-house metadata foundation so rules are written once and applied everywhere, with a best-in-class data-quality engine embedded ahead of matching — records are cleansed before they are mastered — and an agentic AI “digital data steward” generating quality rules and detecting anomalies with reasoning transparency. It is platform-first rather than a pure-play MDM, so deep real-time operational or transactional mastering is generally weaker than Reltio or Informatica and it leans toward analytical use cases. Product and PIM depth is limited, so commerce-led catalog buyers will want a dedicated PIM, and advanced customization, tuning, and self-managed deployments demand expert teams.

Syndigo

Specialist — Product Syndication

Getting product content to channels is the actual problem it solves: the Active Content Engine combines PIM, MDM from the Riversand acquisition, digital asset management, and one of the largest content-syndication networks, distributing governed product content to thousands of retailer, distributor, and marketplace endpoints, delivered as cloud-native SaaS with AI automating ingestion, classification, and enrichment. The sweet spot is product and supplier data for commerce — this is not a general-purpose customer, party, or finance hub. The MDM capability arrived through acquisition, so confirm how deeply it integrates with the broader content and syndication stack for your domains, and buyers needing enterprise multidomain governance beyond product should weigh a broader platform.

🔎
Market Insight
MDM is being pulled in two directions at once. It is converging with data quality, catalogs, and governance into broader “data-trust” platforms — standalone MDM increasingly arrives bundled with active metadata and lineage — even as a fresh wave of AI raises the stakes: large language models now assist matching and survivorship, and agents need a governed entity layer to reason over. Layered on top is unmistakable consolidation, with Informatica now absorbed by Salesforce and Reltio by SAP. The practical takeaway for buyers: weigh each platform’s independence and roadmap continuity as heavily as its features, because the vendor you sign may already answer to a different parent — or could within the life of the contract.

Section 6

How much should you budget for Master Data Management (MDM)?

Budgeting for MDM involves more than just subscription fees, which vary by records, consumption, or users across vendors like Informatica, SAP, and Reltio. Implementation and ongoing stewardship costs typically dwarf license fees over a multi-year view. Model people and integration efforts, considering how costs scale with record volume, source systems, and non-production environments.

MDM pricing has largely moved to subscription, but the unit of measure varies — records or profiles under management, consumption/compute, named stewardship users, or domains and environments — and that unit, more than the headline rate, drives what you pay as data and usage grow. Just as important, implementation and stewardship typically dwarf license in a multi-year view, so model the people and integration effort, not only the platform fee, and watch how cost scales with record volume, the number of source systems, and non-production environments.

Vendor Pricing Model Relative Tier Key Cost Drivers
Informatica MDM IDMC subscription; consumption (capacity) + edition tiers Premium Records/profiles mastered, consumption units, domain apps and add-on modules, governance/catalog scope, environments
SAP MDG License tied to the SAP/S⁄4HANA stack + named users Premium Named users, domains in scope, co-deploy vs. dedicated hub, cloud edition vs. on-prem, broader SAP/RISE bundling
Reltio Cloud SaaS consumption (profiles under management + API/usage) Premium Profiles/records under management, API call volume, domains, prebuilt industry packs, environments
Stibo Systems Subscription by domain / records / users; SaaS or self-managed Premium Domains (esp. product/PIM), catalog and record volume, syndication channels, users, deployment model
Semarchy Subscription by records / environments; modular xDM + xDI Moderate Records under management, environments, modules (MDM, RDM, integration), SaaS vs. self-hosted
Profisee Platform subscription; managed Azure or customer-hosted Moderate Domains and record volume, stewardship users, environments, managed vs. self-hosted, Fabric/Purview usage
IBM MDM Consumption on Cloud Pak for Data (capacity / records) Moderate–Premium Mastered records, capacity/compute, Cloud Pak for Data footprint, Knowledge Catalog and add-ons, managed vs. self-managed
EBX Subscription by model/environment + named users Moderate–Premium Number of data models/domains, named users, environments, on-prem vs. SaaS vs. container edition, support tier
Ataccama Platform subscription spanning DQ, governance, and MDM modules Moderate Modules in scope, data volume processed, environments, cloud vs. hybrid vs. self-managed, AI features
Syndigo SaaS subscription by SKUs/records + syndication recipients Moderate Product records/SKUs, syndication endpoints and recipients, content and DAM scope, MDM domains, enrichment usage
3-Year TCO Formula
TCO = (Subscription × 36 months) + Implementation & Data Modeling + Source-System Integration & Write-Back + Data-Quality Remediation + Ongoing Stewardship FTE + Environments − Retired Legacy/Point Tools − Avoided Rework & Duplicate-Data Cost

Section 7

How long does implementation take for Master Data Management (MDM)?

MDM implementation typically takes 9-15 months, beginning with a 1-3 month govern and scope phase. The next 3-6 months focus on modeling and matching data, followed by 6-9 months for integration and write-back to systems like CRM and ERP. The final phase, from 9-15 months, involves expanding and operating the program.

Sequence the rollout by domain value and governance readiness, not by what is easiest to load. Prove that one high-value domain can be matched, stewarded, and written back before scaling — an MDM program earns trust one governed domain at a time.

Phase 1
Govern & Scope (Months 1–3)

Pick the first high-value domain, name business data owners and stewards, and define golden-record, survivorship, and data-quality rules with the business — not just IT. Profile source systems, agree on the mastering style (registry, consolidation, or coexistence), and set success criteria the stewards themselves validate in the POC.

Phase 2
Model & Match (Months 3–6)

Stand up the platform, model the domain and hierarchies, and configure and tune match, survivorship, and trust scoring against your real, messy data. Build the stewardship workflows and confirm an actual steward can resolve a merge conflict unaided before going wider.

Phase 3
Integrate & Write Back (Months 6–9)

Wire in the consuming systems — CRM, ERP, and the warehouse/lakehouse — via real-time and batch APIs, and prove bidirectional write-back so corrected golden records reach source systems intact. Establish event/CDC flows and reconcile that downstream consumers actually use the mastered record.

Phase 4
Expand & Operate (Months 9–15)

Onboard additional domains and sources, formalize stewardship as a standing operating model with SLAs and data-quality monitoring, and tie MDM into the catalog and governance program. Review cost, match quality, and adoption against the original scope and tune.


Section 8

What should you ask vendors about Master Data Management (MDM)?

Use this checklist during evaluation to ensure each shortlisted platform covers what actually decides an MDM program — governance and consumption, not just the match engine.


Questions buyers ask

Frequently asked questions about Master Data Management (MDM)

When is a 'moderate' priced MDM solution like Semarchy or Profisee genuinely sufficient, rather than needing a 'premium' option like Informatica or Reltio?

A moderate-priced solution like Semarchy or Profisee is sufficient when your needs align with their strengths. Semarchy suits organizations wanting fast, flexible multidomain MDM unified with data integration and quality on one model-driven platform, while Profisee is ideal for mid-market-to-enterprise organizations standardized on Microsoft and Azure, especially Fabric and Purview, or replacing Microsoft MDS.

Given Reltio’s acquisition by SAP, what are the implications for non-SAP shops considering Reltio for a Customer 360 initiative?

Reltio’s acquisition by SAP means it will anchor master data in SAP Business Data Cloud. While SAP states Reltio remains available standalone for the foreseeable future, non-SAP shops should consider potential long-term roadmap shifts and vendor-neutrality questions, similar to Informatica’s acquisition by Salesforce for non-Salesforce shops.

What are common unexpected costs that arise when implementing MDM, beyond the core subscription fees for vendors like Informatica or Stibo Systems?

Unexpected costs can arise from factors beyond core subscription fees. For Informatica, these include consumption units, add-on modules, and governance/catalog scope. For Stibo Systems, costs can increase with additional domains (especially product/PIM), catalog and record volume, syndication channels, and user count, often requiring enterprise-scale implementations.

If our primary challenge is product data across multiple retail channels, should we still consider a multidomain hub like Semarchy over a PIM-led MDM like Stibo Systems or Syndigo?

For product data across multiple retail channels, a PIM-led MDM like Stibo Systems or Syndigo is generally recommended. Stibo offers the deepest product-domain heritage, pairing rich PIM with customer, supplier, and location data. Semarchy’s product-domain capabilities, while strong for general MDM, may not match the deep merchandising, syndication, or DAM needs of retail.

What are the specific risks of choosing IBM MDM if our enterprise is not fully invested in Cloud Pak for Data?

The full value of IBM MDM is tied to the Cloud Pak for Data footprint. If your enterprise is not fully invested, you risk not realizing the complete benefits of the platform. Additionally, be explicit about licensing the modern cloud-native line (Match 360) versus legacy InfoSphere MDM, and plan for potential migration.

Section 9

Related Resources

From the directory

Vendors in this category

Directory listings for the Master Data Management (MDM) space— independent of this guide’s evaluation. Compare profiles in the CIOPages directory, or claim yours.

Acceldata Claim
Alation Claim
Anomalo Claim
Apache Atlas Claim
Ataccama Claim
Atlan Claim
Bigeye Claim
CKAN Claim
Castor Claim
Collibra Claim
Browse all in the directory Work at one of these? Claim your listing
The Throughline
One decision facing technology leaders, monthly.

Independent. No sponsorships. Unsubscribe anytime.

Tags:MDMInformatica MDMSAP MDGReltioStibo SystemsSemarchyProfiseeIBM MDMEBXAtaccamaSyndigoMaster DataGolden RecordMultidomain MDMPIM