Skip to content
BeryX

BeryX · Comparison

Which data quality tool makes sense for you?

The dimensions that decide a purchase, three classes of alternatives and BeryX side by side, with the source for every cell. We say where we win — and where the alternative is the better choice.

The full matrix

The dimensions that decide a purchase.

We compare classes of tools, not products one by one: there are differences within each class, but the way of working is the same. When a cell names a product, the claim is about that product only.

The dimensions that decide a purchase.
DimensionEnterprise (Collibra, Informatica)Open-source DIY (Great Expectations, Soda)Cloud observability (Monte Carlo, Sifflet)BeryX
Proof before you buyDemo and proof of concept run with the vendor or an integrator[1][2]Install and try it right away: GX Core and Soda Core are open source[3][4]Demo or trial requested through a sales form[5]

Self-service free account, no card and no sales call, plus a public proof on open data: 30 files scanned in 32 s

Time-to-valueA project with an integrator and implementation services; Collibra DQ is installed in the customer's environment[1][2]First check in hours; coverage and investigation are ongoing engineering workMetadata monitors once the warehouse is connected, without querying the tables (Monte Carlo), as SaaS or with a collector in your environment; Metaplane documents exceptions for Postgres, MySQL and SQL Server[6][7][8]

First scan in under 15 minutes; metadata monitors on every dataset in the connection from the first scan, up to 500 per connection

FixingCleansing, standardization and MDM that write to your systems (Informatica IDMC) — requires write credentials and a project[2]Tests fail. Someone investigates and fixes by handDetects, alerts and helps investigate; the fix stays with your team[5][7]

Proposes the fix in SQL/PySpark or as a pull request, with € savings and risk — read-only by contract

Fixes where the code livesWorkflows inside the platform[1][2]You write the PRAn alert linking to the platform; the PR is up to your team[5]

An accepted fix opens a pull request in GitHub or GitLab, syncs its state, and the next scan confirms it worked

Evidence

Tests you already haveSuite-native rules; no announced import of dbt, Great Expectations or Soda[1][2]They are your tests — and your maintenanceMonitors in their own YAML or in dbt meta; Monte Carlo generates monitors from dbt tests, singular tests included, and Sifflet opens incidents when a dbt test fails; no announced export back as dbt tests or import of Great Expectations or Soda[9][10][11][12][13]

Imports dbt tests, singular tests included, Great Expectations suites and SodaCL and exports back to dbt, SodaCL and GX; relationships becomes a referential integrity rule; what doesn't convert (macros and Jinja beyond ref, source and config), or wouldn't come back unchanged from the SodaCL and GX export, is reported, never silently dropped

Custom checksInformatica: rule specifications built from graphical elements or IF-THEN-ELSE expressions; Collibra: custom SQL rules with joins and aggregations, hand-written or AI-suggested — pushdown jobs only[14][15][16]SQL and Python without limits: singular tests and macros (dbt), custom expectations in Python or SQL (Great Expectations), SQL checks (Soda)[17][18][19][20]Metadata monitors; Monte Carlo accepts custom SQL monitors, with manual or learned thresholds[6][21]

16 rule types (nulls, uniqueness, patterns, ranges, freshness, volume, check-digit validity for tax IDs and IBANs, reference lists, opt-in accuracy against authoritative sources, streams (Kafka and Pub/Sub, not yet installed in the SaaS), cross-column conditions, custom SQL and referential integrity across datasets), industry packs and suggestions from the profile and from acceptance history; custom SQL is a single read-only SELECT, validated before it runs in the source (SQL sources only); no custom Python checks

Work signals and new rulesStewardship workflows: issues are logged by hand and rules are written by stewards[1]Complaints arrive as tickets; you write and maintain every testOpen tickets in Jira or ServiceNow and learn monitors; they don't read your teams' complaints[5]

Reads Jira, Confluence and Slack and turns complaints into issues linked to the right dataset; proposes rules from the profile, from the resolved issue and from those complaints — they only land when you accept them. The Teams connector is built, with its driver not yet installed in the SaaS

Evidence

Memory of what already happenedGlossary and manual stewardship[1]—Incident history per table[5]

A knowledge base of reports and diagnoses, semantic search and a sources↔data↔knowledge graph; the assistant and the diagnoses cite it

Governance and stewardshipCatalog and business glossary are the suite's system of record; in Collibra, quality scores sit right on the data marketplace[22]Out of scope: tests live in your repository and wiring them into the catalog is up to youThe focus is detecting and investigating incidents; formal governance and stewardship aren't the product[5][7]

Business glossary linked to columns, owner and steward per dataset, tags and an exportable data dictionary; publishes verdicts to your OpenMetadata or DataHub and reads owners, domains and tags from it

Multi-source viewA broad suite, licensed per module[1][2]One test repository per sourceStrong on warehouses; limited operational SaaS sources[5][7]

Warehouses, operational DBs and SaaS in a single view

Evidence

Business-process integration (SAP, Salesforce)Quality inside the process, with write-back: SAP MDG validates master-data changes against business rules before activating them; Informatica cleanses, standardizes and validates with agents and brings data quality into applications (Informatica Headless). Collibra connects to S/4HANA through Edge, for the catalog[23][24][25]Tests run in your pipeline, on data already written; calling them from SAP or Salesforce is integration you write and maintainMonte Carlo connects to Salesforce CRM and SAP HANA and monitors data already written (freshness, volume, schema, SQL rules); no announced validation at the point of entry[26][27]

Reads SAP S/4HANA and SAP Gateway over OData, Salesforce, Dynamics 365 and the ERP databases on SQL Server (Primavera, PHC, Sage). Validates records at the point of entry: the integrator calls the dataset's rules through the API before writing them and gets a verdict for each record, with nothing stored by BeryX. Never writes to the ERP or the CRM: the fix comes out as SQL/PySpark or a PR

Trust for AI agentsCatalog and AI governance; no announced readiness verdict per use case[1][28]—Monitor data and pipelines; no announced verdict on the dataset before an agent consumes it[5][7]

Explainable trust score and readiness per use case (RAG, training, agent, BI), a pre-ingestion gate for RAG and an MCP server so the agent asks before it uses

Where the work runs — and what leaves your perimeterVendor SaaS or installation in the customer's environment (Collibra DQ installs there): once installed, processing stays on your infrastructure[1][28]Runs in your pipeline, on your warehouse or your Spark: nothing leaves — operations and scale are on youRead warehouse metadata and query logs, as SaaS or with the collector in your environment (Monte Carlo)[7]

On SQL sources, profiling runs in the source itself and only aggregates and a few examples per column come back; row-level rules and duplicates use a sample of up to 5,000 rows per table, processed in the EU. We keep results and limited examples, never the table. With AI on, examples follow the workspace's AI policy

AI in your own accountAI built into the vendor's platform; no announced own key or model in your cloud account[1][2]—AI built into the vendor's platform; no announced model in your cloud account[5][7]

Your own key, Claude in your AWS or GCP account, a per-workspace model policy with an “AI off” mode, and samples anonymised before any budget provider

AI Act complianceAI governance as a suite module (Collibra: ISO 42001)[28]—No announced Art. 50 labelling or Art. 10 dossier[5][29]

Art. 50 labelling on every AI output + exportable Art. 10 dossier

Security, residency and certificationsInformatica: ISO 27001 (BSI) and SOC 2 Type II; Collibra: SOC 2 and ISO 27001/42001, with a public trust center. SaaS or installed in the customer's environment[1][2][28]Runs inside your perimeter: security and certification are those of your own infrastructureMonte Carlo and Sifflet: SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001; Monte Carlo as SaaS or hybrid, with the collector in your environment[5][7][29]

SaaS hosted in the EU (Google Cloud europe-west1), read-only enforced in code and optional AI with your own key or in your own AWS or GCP account (Bedrock or Vertex), with samples that can be anonymised before the model. A fixed egress IP (Cloud NAT) for your firewall allow-list: built, not yet active in production. SOC 2 Type I in progress, ISO 27001 next — no badges we don't have: we don't claim them, and we answer with the technical evidence for each control

Identity and administrationSSO and role-based access control, included in the suite[1][2]Open source has no users; SSO and roles come with paid cloud plans (e.g. Soda Team)[4]SSO and roles on higher-tier plans[5]

OIDC single sign-on with your IdP (Entra ID, Google Workspace, Keycloak…), TOTP MFA mandatory for organisation admins and enforceable across the workspace, per-workspace roles, teams, an audit log exportable to CSV and support access only with your consent, read-only and for 72 h at most; no SCIM yet

Support and SLASupport and availability levels in the contract — Informatica IDMC: 99.5% with service credits; Collibra: a public status page[1][2][30]Community support for open source; support with an SLA only on paid plans[3][4]Support and SLA by plan, in the annual contract[5]

No contractual availability or support SLA yet: it only goes into the contract after a quarter of measured availability and a support policy by severity, still being defined. Today: daily backups with 7-day PITR and offline mode if AI fails

Data exitEnd-of-contract data extraction, under the service terms[1][2]Tests and results are already yours, in code and in your warehouseData exports only on the Scale and Enterprise plans (Monte Carlo)[31]

Self-service export of the workspace data (GDPR) and of the configuration as code (datavault.yaml)

Real costPublic UK G-Cloud prices: Collibra DQ £122,919 per licence/year; Informatica IDMC £74,999/year, plus implementation[1][2]Licence 0; Soda Team $750/month, plus warehouse compute and engineering hours[4]Annual contracts or per monitored table (Metaplane, with 10 tables free); Sifflet ≈$48k/year at published pricing[5][32]

Free plan; paid plans from €490/mo, no implementation project

Sources

Vendors' public pages behind the competitor columns. The numbers in the table point here; the BeryX column links to the RFP answers and the security page.

  1. 1.UK G-Cloud — Collibra Data Quality (service 136629392504870) · applytosupply.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk ·
  2. 2.UK G-Cloud — Informatica IDMC (service 727452156234281) · applytosupply.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk ·
  3. 3.Great Expectations — plans and pricing · greatexpectations.io ·
  4. 4.Soda — plans and pricing · soda.io ·
  5. 5.Sifflet — plans and pricing · siffletdata.com ·
  6. 6.Monte Carlo — docs: monitors overview · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  7. 7.Monte Carlo — docs: security and compliance overview · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  8. 8.Metaplane — docs: monitor types · docs.metaplane.dev ·
  9. 9.Monte Carlo — docs: Monitors as Code (montecarlo.yml and dbt schema.yml meta) · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  10. 10.Monte Carlo — docs: generating monitors from dbt tests · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  11. 11.Sifflet — docs: Monitors as Code (workspaces and monitors in YAML) · docs.siffletdata.com ·
  12. 12.Sifflet — docs: incidents from monitor runs or dbt tests · docs.siffletdata.com ·
  13. 13.Metaplane — docs: Monitors as Code (in dbt model meta) · docs.metaplane.dev ·
  14. 14.Informatica — docs: rule specification modes · docs.informatica.com ·
  15. 15.Collibra — docs: about the rule workbench (custom SQL rules) · productresources.collibra.com ·
  16. 16.Collibra — docs: supported SQL rule types · productresources.collibra.com ·
  17. 17.dbt — docs: data tests (singular and generic) · docs.getdbt.com ·
  18. 18.Great Expectations — docs: define a custom Expectation class · docs.greatexpectations.io ·
  19. 19.Great Expectations — docs: use SQL to define a custom Expectation · docs.greatexpectations.io ·
  20. 20.Soda — docs: user-defined checks (SodaCL) · docs.soda.io ·
  21. 21.Monte Carlo — docs: Custom SQL monitors · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  22. 22.Collibra — Data Quality & Observability · collibra.com ·
  23. 23.SAP — Master Data Governance · sap.com ·
  24. 24.Informatica — Data Quality & Observability · informatica.com ·
  25. 25.Collibra Marketplace — Driver for S/4HANA Integration · marketplace.collibra.com ·
  26. 26.Monte Carlo — docs: Salesforce CRM integration · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  27. 27.Monte Carlo — docs: SAP HANA integration · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  28. 28.Collibra — Trust Center · collibra.com ·
  29. 29.Monte Carlo — Trust Center · trust.montecarlo.ai ·
  30. 30.Collibra — status page · status.collibra.com ·
  31. 31.Monte Carlo — docs: data exports · docs.getmontecarlo.com ·
  32. 32.Metaplane — plans and pricing · metaplane.dev ·

Public sources from the vendors, checked on 2026-09-28 — every competitor cell cites its own in the list above. BeryX's claims are backed by evidence in the RFP answers. Our certification status is generated from the same record as the Security and Trust page: when it changes there, it changes here. If something is out of date, write to suporte@praxis.lbostuff.tech and we'll fix it.

Plans

What each plan includes.

Generated from the product's plan catalog: the same limits and features the app enforces.

What each plan includes.
Gratuito€0/monthTeam€490/monthBusiness€1,190/monthEnterpriseCustom
Limits
Data sources1515Unlimited
Datasets255002,000Unlimited
Scans per month30UnlimitedUnlimitedUnlimited
AI reports per month52001,000Unlimited
AI tokens per month300K5M20MUnlimited
RAG gate documents per month1K50K500KUnlimited
Measurement history30 days1 year2 yearsUnlimited
Default profilingStandardStandardDeepDeep
Maximum profilingStandardDeepDeepDeep
Features
API tokensNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
Alert webhooksNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
Document analysis for RAGNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
Scheduled email reportsNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
Synthetic data from the profileNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
Entity matching across datasetsNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
Business glossary linked to columnsNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
Read-only rehearsal of the fix before accepting itNot includedIncludedIncludedIncluded
AI Act compliance dossierNot includedNot includedIncludedIncluded
Platform cost telemetryNot includedNot includedIncludedIncluded
Remediation as a Pull Request (GitHub/GitLab)Not includedNot includedIncludedIncluded
Your own Anthropic key (BYOK)Not includedNot includedIncludedIncluded
Choice of AI models per taskNot includedNot includedIncludedIncluded
Claude in your organisation's cloud account (Amazon Bedrock or Google Vertex AI)Not includedNot includedNot includedIncluded

On every plan: the full quality engine, fix suggestions and offline mode without AI. Prices per month and per workspace, excluding VAT, billed annually (monthly billing costs 20% more).

Class by class

Where each alternative wins — and where BeryX is different.

Collibra, Informatica

BeryX vs Enterprise

Full data governance suites: catalog, business glossary, stewardship workflows, master data management. They are platforms for multi-year governance programs with dedicated teams.

Choose them if

  • You need a corporate catalog and business glossary as the system of record.
  • You run a formal governance program with stewards and approvals.
  • You need an operational MDM hub — a golden record written back to the ERP and the CRM.
  • Your budget and timeline can absorb a multi-month implementation.
  • Your RFP requires an already-issued ISO 27001/SOC 2 certification, a contractual SLA with credits or an on-prem installation today.

Where BeryX is different

  • First scan in minutes, not an implementation project.
  • It doesn't stop at the alert: it proposes the fix in SQL or PySpark, with estimated savings and risk.
  • We detect duplicates within and across systems, propose the surviving record with explainable survivorship rules, and deliver the consolidation proposal as SQL or a PR for your process to approve.
  • Coexists with the suite: publishes verdicts to your catalog and reads owners and domains from it.
  • AI Act Art. 50 labeling and Art. 10 dossier ready to use, not a generic module.

Together — BeryX doesn't replace the catalog you already have. It has a business glossary linked to columns, an owner and a steward per dataset, tags and a data dictionary that also exports as files to load into OpenMetadata and DataHub. It publishes verdicts, scores and the result of each rule to that catalog — OpenMetadata and DataHub today — and reads owners, domains and tags from it, so quality shows up where people look for data.

Book a demo

Great Expectations, Soda

BeryX vs Open-source DIY

Code-first data testing frameworks. Free, flexible and great in CI — as long as you have the engineering to write them, maintain them and investigate every failure.

Choose them if

  • Your engineering team wants full control, everything in code and versioned.
  • You have a few well-known sources and tests that rarely change.
  • Zero license cost is the deciding criterion.
  • You need Python or SQL checks without limits, or to run them on local DataFrames and in notebooks, without a service.
  • No data may leave your perimeter, not even aggregates or samples: tests run in your pipeline, on your warehouse or your Spark.

Where BeryX is different

  • Imports dbt (including dbt-utils and dbt-expectations), Great Expectations, Soda and ODCS — and exports back to dbt (with SQL rules as singular tests), SodaCL, GX and ODCS; in SodaCL and GX, what would not come back unchanged through the import is listed in the file, with the reason. The relationships test becomes a referential integrity rule. Singular tests become read-only SQL rules, over tables in the same connection; those that use macros, var() or other Jinja beyond ref(), source() and config() are left out, with the reason.
  • Configuration as code: datavault.yaml and Terraform, with a diff before you apply.
  • Automatic monitors, per-segment anomalies and schema changes without writing a rule.
  • When a test fails, it explains the cause (lineage, dbt runs, Jira signals) and proposes the fix in SQL/PySpark with the risk analyzed.

Together — Keep your tests in the repository. BeryX imports them, runs profiling and automatic monitors on top, and exports the rules created in the UI as dbt tests for your dbt test.

Create a free account

Monte Carlo, Sifflet

BeryX vs Cloud observability

Warehouse-centered data observability platforms: freshness, volume and schema monitoring from metadata, with lineage and alerting at scale.

Choose them if

  • Your data estate lives almost entirely in a large-scale modern warehouse.
  • You need metadata monitoring across thousands of tables, deeply integrated with the cloud stack.
  • You have an enterprise annual contract and a platform team to run it.
  • You need pipeline and compute observability — job and query run times, dbt Gantt charts, Spark traces — not just the quality of what they produce.
  • You need an already-issued SOC 2 Type II report or ISO 27001 certificate today, or a contractual SLA with credits.

Where BeryX is different

  • Closes the loop: detects, explains and proposes the fix with risk analyzed.
  • Goes beyond the warehouse: operational DBs, SaaS and object storage in the same view.
  • Freshness, volume and schema from metadata on every dataset in the connection, up to 500 per connection — Postgres, MySQL and SQL Server included, as far as each source's catalog exposes them — without a single query to the tables; real usage (BigQuery, Snowflake and Databricks query logs) suggests where deep profiling is worth it. Priced per plan with published source and dataset limits, not per monitored table.
  • Reads Jira and Confluence to link real complaints to the right datasets.
  • Reads the platform's query logs and system views (INFORMATION_SCHEMA.JOBS, ACCESS_HISTORY, system tables) for two things: suggesting what to monitor based on real usage and catching cost spikes in euros, next to the score — per dataset and with the queries responsible for the spike where the platform attributes cost per table (BigQuery, today); per account where it doesn't.
  • The workspace configuration — rules, domains, data policy and whether automatic monitors are on — exports to and imports from YAML (datavault.yaml) for code review; dbt, Great Expectations and Soda tests come in and go back out as dbt.

Together — If you already have warehouse observability, BeryX covers the operational sources and the fix — the part metadata monitoring leaves to your team. If you already keep monitors as code in your observability vendor, BeryX doesn't import them — it reads the dbt tests they read too. Datadog or Monte Carlo Performance for how long the jobs take; BeryX for what the job delivered and what it cost per dataset.

Book a demo

Honesty first

When BeryX isn't for you.

  • 01You're looking for a data catalog as your main product.
  • 02You need an MDM hub that writes the golden record to your systems — we propose the merge, we don't execute it; and we measure the quality of what comes out of your hub.
  • 03You want the tool to write directly to your sources — BeryX is read-only by contract; fixes are proposed and applied with approval.
  • 04You need to monitor tens of thousands of tables in a single warehouse, and only that.
  • 05Your RFP requires an issued SOC 2 report or ISO 27001 certificate today: both are in progress and we don't have them yet.
  • 06You need SCIM provisioning right now: today accounts join by invitation or on their first SSO login (OIDC).
  • 07You need not even a sample to leave your network (on-prem, air-gapped): today row-level rules and duplicates read up to 5,000 rows per table into our worker in the EU, and a runner inside your perimeter depends on real demand.

Compare on your data, not on a table.

Send us your RFP grid: we answer line by line, with evidence. Or connect a source on the free plan and compare on your own data.