Compare yieldWerx and FACTIVITY - Jun 2022
Compare PricingWe publish unbiased reviews. Our opinions are our own and are not influenced by payments from advertisers. This content is reader-supported, which means if you leave your details with us we may earn a commission. Learn why ITQlick is free .
Bottom Line: Which is Better - yieldWerx or FACTIVITY?
FACTIVITY is more expensive to implement (TCO) than yieldWerx, and FACTIVITY is rated higher (84/100) than yieldWerx (83/100). FACTIVITY offers users more features (6) than yieldWerx (2).
Looking for the right Manufacturing solution for your business? Buyers are primarily concerned about the real total cost of implementation (TCO), the full list of features, vendor reliability, user reviews, and the pros and cons. In this article we compare between the two software products:
yieldWerx Vs. FACTIVITY
yieldWerx: Architected for flexible end-to-end yield management Adaptable to each customers unique needs Capable of addressing complex yield management issues
FACTIVITY: FACTIVITY sells products that help manufacturers manage inventory better, shrink cycle time, and increase productivity. The company shipped its first totally integrated manufacturing execution system and positioned itself to take advantage of the growing manufacturing solutions marketplace. We look to the future to provide a variety of "state-o...
Who is more expensive? yieldWerx or FACTIVITY?
The real total cost of ownership (TCO) of Manufacturing software includes the software license, subscription fees, software training, customizations, hardware (if needed), maintenance and support and other related services. When calculating the TCO, it's important to add all of these ”hidden costs” as well. We prepared a TCO (Total Cost) calculator for yieldWerx and FACTIVITY.
yieldWerx accurate pricing info is available upon request (they don't share it publicly), however , On a scale between 1 to 10 yieldWerx is rated 2, which is much lower than the average cost of Manufacturing software. FACTIVITY price starts at $50,000 per license , When comparing FACTIVITY to its competitors, the software is rated 8 - higher than the average Manufacturing software cost.
Bottom line: FACTIVITY is more expensive than yieldWerx.
Which software includes more/better features?
We've compared yieldWerx Vs. FACTIVITY based on some of the most important and required Manufacturing features.
yieldWerx: Manufacturing, Quality management.
FACTIVITY: Supply Chain Planning, Manufacturing, Document Management, Enterprise Resource Planning, Budgeting & CPM.
Target customer size
yieldWerx's typical customers include: Small, medium and large size businesses, and FACTIVITY's target customer size include: Small, medium and large size businesses.
Compare specifications
yieldWerx Specifications
ITQlick Score: | 83/100 |
---|---|
ITQlick Rating: |
|
Pricing: | 2/10 - low cost |
Category: | Manufacturing -> yieldWerx review |
Company: | yieldWerx |
Typical customers: | Small, medium and large size businesses |
Platforms: | Desktop, Mobile, Cloud |
Links: | yieldWerx review, yieldWerx pricing, yieldWerx alternatives |
FACTIVITY Specifications
ITQlick Score: | 84/100 |
---|---|
ITQlick Rating: |
|
Pricing: | 8/10 - high cost |
Category: | Manufacturing Execution Software (MES) -> FACTIVITY review |
Company: | FACTIVITY |
Pricing: | starts at $50,000 per license |
Typical customers: | Small, medium and large size businesses |
Platforms: | Desktop, Cloud |
Links: | FACTIVITY review, FACTIVITY pricing, FACTIVITY alternatives |
Compare features
yieldWerx: 2 Features
FACTIVITY: 6 Features
Auditor - Shlomi Lavi
Shlomi Lavi is an entrepreneur and founder of ITQlick.com. He holds a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) in Information Systems Engineering from Ben Gurion University in Israel. Shlomi brings 17 years of global IT and IS management experience as a consultant and implementation expert for small, medium and large-sized (global) companies. Shlomi’s goal is to share the best knowledge and news about information systems so you can make smarter buying decisions for your business.