SAP LeanIX and Ardoq: Comparing Two Approaches to Enterprise Architecture

Two tools often compared

SAP LeanIX and Ardoq often appear in the same evaluations. Both link applications, technologies, capabilities and transformation projects in one repository. Their vendors nonetheless describe different starting points, set out in the following sections from their own publications.

SAP LeanIX: the application portfolio, then modules

LeanIX has been part of SAP since the acquisition closed on 8 November 2023, and the product is named SAP LeanIX. Its base is the Application Portfolio Management module, which covers applications, their lifecycle, their dependencies and their functional and technical fit. Since November 2025, Application Portfolio Management has also included a hub for listing and governing AI agents, now presented as SAP AI Agent Hub.

Two modules build on it. Technology Risk and Compliance surfaces end-of-life software, ageing hardware and unapproved technology stacks. Architecture and Road Map Planning is used to design target scenarios, link planned changes to projects and monitor transformation initiatives.

SAP LeanIX also publishes a list of integrations, including ServiceNow, Microsoft Entra ID, GitHub Enterprise, Jira, Confluence, SAP Signavio and REST and GraphQL APIs.

Ardoq: a platform built on a graph

Ardoq presents its platform as built on a graph from the ground up. The vendor highlights full metamodel flexibility, built-in surveys and AI agents configured to the customer’s metamodel and governance rules.

Ardoq publishes a list of integrations that includes ServiceNow, Microsoft Entra ID, Azure, AWS, Jira, Confluence, SharePoint, Excel and a REST API. On 8 June 2026, the vendor announced the acquisition of GraphLake, a database combining RDF and property graphs, with a phased rollout from the second half of 2026.

Criteria for choosing

Start from your practice: a few questions separate the tools more reliably than a feature grid.

• Primary use: rationalising the portfolio and tracking technology lifecycles, or detailed dependency analysis from integrated data.
• Contributors: architects only, or also product teams, business units, risk and management.
• Integrations: the sources that must feed the model continuously, such as cloud, CMDB or development tools.
• Governance: who validates a data item, who decides on a change and where the decision is kept.
• Hosting: the data region, the subprocessors and the contractual terms of each vendor.

ArchiLU in the same evaluation

ArchiLU, published in Luxembourg by MIP-IT SARL, starts from ownership and decisions. Each object can have an owner, who confirms their objects every twelve months. Requests, architecture documents and the Board’s decision log rely on the same graph.

For entities subject to DORA, the chain links each critical or important function to its processes, applications, ICT providers and their contracts. Each organisation has its own dedicated instance, hosted in the European Union; deployment on your infrastructure is an optional service, quoted separately. The offers include unlimited users, readers included.

The three tools cover different functions. A useful comparison applies the same real scope, documented in each of them.

Testing on your own case

Choose a domain: a few applications, their technologies, their providers and a decision to be made. Have it documented in each shortlisted tool, then compare the effort to feed the model, how the data holds up over time and what each role reads. ArchiLU can be tried free for one month on your own instance.