Best for
Best for PMOs that balance capacity across many teams while those teams keep working in their own tools.
- Enterprise
Resource Planning Comparison
At a glance
Best for
Best for PMOs that balance capacity across many teams while those teams keep working in their own tools.
Best for
Best for large project-driven organizations that need enterprise resource planning on their own infrastructure.
Cataleo does not name a winner. Both statements come from the vendors themselves.
| Criterion | Meisterplan | Saviom |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | From $720 / month The smallest package is the Basic edition for 50 resources, at $720 per month or $7,200 per year. Users are free and unlimited, so only the people booked to projects count. Packages run up to 1,000 resources; above that the vendor quotes. | Price on request Quoted by the number of Power and Lite licences and by the product requirements. SAVIOM says the quote does not change as the number of people managed grows, and that a ballpark figure is given on request. |
| Free trial | 30 days, no credit card required, with the functionality of the Pro Edition | 4 to 6 weeks, with walkthroughs throughout |
| Users | Users are free and unlimited; licensing counts resources, where one full-time equivalent equals one resource | Licensed per user: Power licences for full system access, Lite licences for view-only access |
| API | Yes, REST API plus a separate reporting API and an MCP endpoint | Not stated |
| Hosting | Cloud | Not a SaaS product; hosted on the customer's own company server or on a cloud server of their choice |
| Made in | Germany (itdesign, Tuebingen) | Not stated |
| Resource planning | Yes, capacity planning at portfolio level with a Team Planner histogram, role-based staffing by availability and what-if scenarios | Yes, scheduling and allocation by skill, role fit and availability, capacity against demand, forecasting and utilization tracking |
| Task planning | No, planning stops at the allocation of people to projects; task detail stays in the connected tools | Yes, demand intake and evaluation workflows at portfolio level, with work assigned by skill, priority and availability |
| Time tracking | No time entry of its own; actual time worked can be imported from Jira nightly and compared with planned allocations | Yes, time tracked against project, task and allocation, with a configurable approval workflow and item-level approval or rejection |
| Reporting and controlling | Yes, portfolio dashboards, financial planning and a reporting API for Power BI, Tableau and Looker Studio | Yes, real-time dashboards, utilization and financial reporting, and business intelligence on individual productivity and cost |
| AI features | stated Yes | No |
| MCP-ready | stated Yes | No |
| Deployment | Cloud (SaaS), Browser-based | On-premise, Browser-based |
| Support | Email helpdesk, Phone | Email helpdesk, Phone |
| Onboarding | more entries Documentation and knowledge base, Guided onboarding, Live online demos and webinars, Personal consulting | Guided onboarding |
| Company size | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Integrations | Jira, Asana, ClickUp, monday.com, Trello, Wrike, Todoist, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Microsoft Planner, ServiceNow, Smartsheet, Salesforce, Microsoft Teams, Slack, Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Power BI, Tableau, Google Looker Studio, Microsoft Excel, Zapier | Not stated |
Adds a column to the table, from the tools in this category.
Row where the values differ The small markers point at the lower number, the longer list or the stated feature. They describe the data, they are not a verdict.
The short version
Every line is one datapoint from the table above, picked automatically. Nothing here is written text.
The trade-offs
Meisterplan
Strengths
Limitations
Saviom
Strengths
Limitations
Plans
Meisterplan
Saviom
What users say
Meisterplan
No reviews yet. Nothing has been published here yet, and no score is shown. How a review is checked before it appears is described below.
Saviom
No reviews yet. Nothing has been published here yet, and no score is shown. How a review is checked before it appears is described below.
Before sending, the author has to confirm three things: that they have used the product themselves, that they work neither for the vendor nor for a competitor, and that nobody is paying them for the review. We also ask whether the vendor invited them to write it. That answer is required, either answer is accepted, and it stays with the review.
Every review is read by a person before it appears. An email address is required and is confirmed: we send a link to it, and a review does not reach us until the author opens that link, so a review has a sender who was reachable at least once rather than being anonymous. Where what somebody writes needs backing, we ask them for evidence that they used the product, and a review that does not get it is not published. We publish positive and negative reviews alike, we pay nothing and offer nothing for a review, and we accept none that was bought or incentivised.
What we cannot do is verify a purchase. There is no shop here and no account, so whether the author really used the tool rests on their own declaration, on whatever we ask them for, and on the plausibility of what they write. We say so rather than implying a check that does not exist.
A vendor cannot buy a review, and cannot have one removed or changed because they dislike it. We remove or edit a review only if it breaks our rules or the law, for example a false statement of fact. Paid placement has no effect on which reviews appear or on any score.
Where this comes from
Meisterplan https://www.meisterplan.com · no check date recorded yet
Saviom https://www.saviom.com · checked against the official source on 2026-09-19
This table lists factual criteria taken from information the vendors publish themselves. For how we put it together, see the methodology.