How Peaqview Is Different
Traditional EA Tools Were Built in Silos
Every vendor solves one half of the problem. None were designed to connect architecture decisions to process performance.
LeanIX, Ardoq, Mega, iServer
Document architecture. No process intelligence. AI bolted on as chatbot.
Celonis, Signavio
Analyze processes. No architecture context. Can't trace bottlenecks to technology root cause.
Signavio + LeanIX
Acquired separately. Different data models. Integration tax. Sync delays.
Comparison Table
| Capability | Traditional EA | Process Mining | SAP (Signavio + LeanIX) | Peaqview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unified Data Model | No | No | Partial (integration) | Yes |
| Native Process Mining | No | Yes | Separate tool | Yes (DFG, Inductive/Heuristics Miner, conformance, variants) |
| AI Architecture Partner | No (or chatbot) | No | Limited | Yes (150+ MCP tools, Claude web) |
| Architecture-to-Process Bridge | No | No | Manual integration | Native |
| BYOK AI (any LLM) | No | No | No | Yes (OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, Mistral, Azure, Bedrock) |
| Full Open-Standards EA Metamodel | Yes | N/A | Partial | Yes |
| ML Cycle Time Prediction | No | Yes | Separate | Yes |
| Obsolescence Intelligence | Basic | No | Product lifecycle catalog | ML-powered with EOL database |
What Only Peaqview Does
One Data Model
Full open-standards EA metamodel and BPMN® support, with an extensible data model. No integration tax. No sync delays. Changes propagate instantly across all views. Multilingual (EN, FR, ES).
Process + Architecture Bridge
Overlay process mining onto your application landscape. Trace a slow Order-to-Cash process directly to the aging applications causing it.
AI That Reasons Across Both
150+ tools via MCP for Claude. Not a chatbot answering questions -- an AI partner that creates objects, generates reports, builds diagrams, and chains multi-step analyses.