What is the key difference between Fracttal, Maximo, Mainsaver and dvgmao?

Fracttal and MaintainX are modern SaaS CMMS (cloud, mobile-first) designed for fast deployment in SMEs. IBM Maximo is the classic enterprise CMMS/EAM, very powerful, designed for large industries with thousands of assets. Mainsaver and similar tools are classic CMMS solutions (on-premise/cloud) with a long track record. All of them are products INDEPENDENT from the ERP — they live in their own database. dvgmao is the NATIVE Business Central option: it lives inside the ERP, reading Item, Resource, Purchase and Cost Center directly.

Why do most SMEs start with Excel to manage maintenance and then migrate to a CMMS?

Excel works for 5-10 machines with basic maintenance. Beyond that, complexity explodes: breakdown history, preventive plans that differ per asset, spare parts consumed, technician hours, cost per asset. The team can't keep everything up to date in Excel. Companies migrate when they feel 3 typical pains: (1) they don't really know how much maintenance of each asset costs them, (2) recurring breakdowns go undetected because there is no exploitable history, (3) preventive planning slips and the department only reacts.

How much does each option cost for a mid-sized industrial company?

Fracttal: ~€30-80/user/month, standard plan. For 15 technical users that's €5,400-14,400/year. IBM Maximo: consultative pricing, typically €50,000-150,000/year in mid-sized industry plus €80,000-300,000 implementation. Mainsaver: €8,000-25,000/year depending on modules. MaintainX: ~€30-50/user/month. dvgmao: annual licence + implementation by quote, scoped to your needs — TCO typically 40-60% lower than international SaaS options for companies running on BC.

Is Maximo really better than dvgmao for large industries?

For companies with many thousands of critical assets, plants across several countries, large-scale maintenance subcontractor management, industrial IoT and 24/7 operations, Maximo has functional depth that dvgmao does not replicate. It is genuinely superior in that profile. For a mid-sized Spanish industrial company (50-500 assets, 1-3 plants, a maintenance team of 5-20 people), Maximo is oversized — you pay for enterprise functionality you don't use, and the integration with your BC is expensive to maintain. In that profile, dvgmao is the efficient option.

Fracttal or MaintainX for a typical Spanish industrial SME?

Fracttal and MaintainX are solid options for companies that DO NOT have BC as their ERP. Their mobile-first SaaS architecture works very well for technical teams on the shop floor using tablets. If your ERP is BC and you want real integration (linking spare parts consumption to BC inventory, posting maintenance cost to the BC cost centre, aligning work orders with BC purchasing), running a separate SaaS means connector plus sync. dvgmao lives inside BC — the integration isn't something to maintain, it is the native architecture.

Can you migrate from Fracttal/Maximo/Mainsaver to dvgmao without losing history?

Yes. Davisa has carried out migrations from several existing CMMS systems. The typical process: extract the asset catalogue from the current CMMS plus breakdown history, preventive plans and spare-part masters. Map them to the BC and dvgmao tables. Historical load. Validation with 4-6 weeks running in parallel (new work orders enter dvgmao directly, history is consulted in the old system) and cutover once confidence is full. Projects of 8-12 weeks for mid-sized industries.

Volver a dvgmao

Productivity

Fracttal, Maximo & Mainsaver vs dvgmao: CMMS in BC

Top CMMS platforms (Fracttal, Maximo, Mainsaver, MaintainX) compared with dvgmao, the native Business Central option. When each one fits.

6 min

Comparison Fracttal Maximo Mainsaver vs dvgmao Business Central

If your company runs Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central and you are evaluating a maintenance management tool (CMMS / EAM), you’ve come across a market full of options — and all of them claim to be the best.

This article compares, without sugar-coating, the most popular CMMS platforms among Spanish industrial companies — Fracttal, IBM Maximo, Mainsaver, MaintainX — against dvgmao, Davisa’s native Business Central CMMS extension.

Context disclosure: dvgmao is a Davisa Informática product. We’ve worked to keep this comparison objective. When a competitor is the right fit for your case, we say so.

Summary table — 5 real options

Dimension	Fracttal	IBM Maximo	Mainsaver	MaintainX	dvgmao
Origin / positioning	Chile/Spain, modern SaaS	IBM, enterprise EAM leader	USA, classic CMMS	USA, mobile-first SaaS	Spain, native BC extension
Target companies	SMEs and mid-market	Large enterprise industry	Industrial SMEs/mid-market	Operations-heavy SMEs	SMEs/mid-market on BC
Integration with BC	Connector / API	Connector + middleware	Connector / file import	REST API	Native AL, no connector
Mobile app for technicians	Yes (a strength)	Yes	Yes	Yes (a strength)	Yes (BC App / web)
Industrial IoT management	Yes	Yes, advanced	Limited	Limited	In development
Complex preventive plans	Yes	Yes, leader	Yes	Yes	Yes
Approx. pricing (15 technicians)	€5,400-14,400/year	€50,000-150,000/year	€8,000-25,000/year	€5,400-9,000/year	By quote
Spare-parts cost flows into BC inventory	Via sync	Via sync	Via sync	Via sync	Yes, native

Fracttal — the modern Spanish-LATAM SaaS

Fracttal originated in Chile and has a strong presence in Spain. It is probably the SaaS most adopted by Spanish industrial SMEs migrating away from Excel. Its strengths: fast deployment (typically 4-8 weeks), modern UI, solid mobile app for technicians on the shop floor.

Where Fracttal fits well

Industrial company without an ERP (or with an ERP that is unfriendly for maintenance).
Distributed technical team that needs a powerful mobile app.
Fast deployment, no multi-month project.
Moderate asset volume (tens to a few hundred).

Where Fracttal falls short if you already run BC

Dual source of truth for master data: the asset catalogue lives in Fracttal, the product catalogue (spare parts) lives in BC. When a technician swaps a spare part, consumption is recorded in Fracttal but BC stock is updated via sync. Discrepancies follow.
Recurring connector cost with BC.
Spare-parts purchasing: the technician raises a need in Fracttal, somebody pushes the order into BC. Double step.

IBM Maximo — the enterprise leader

Maximo is the historical EAM (Enterprise Asset Management) benchmark in heavy industry: refineries, chemical plants, automotive, energy, rail transport. One of the most mature tools in the world.

Where Maximo fits well

Industrial multinationals with thousands of critical assets.
24/7 operations with high downtime costs.
Industrial IoT integrated with SCADA/PLC machinery.
Advanced maintenance subcontractor management.
Strict regulatory compliance (ATEX, pharma, food).

Where Maximo does NOT apply to SMEs

Prohibitive cost (€50,000-150,000/year + implementation).
Oversized for companies with 50-500 assets.
Typical implementation of 6-12 months.

Mainsaver and similar — classic CMMS

Mainsaver, eMaint and similar tools are classic CMMS platforms with a long track record. Good products, but they compete in the same space as Fracttal and MaintainX with less visible differentiation.

MaintainX — the mobile-first SaaS

MaintainX is probably the most “millennial” SaaS in this segment. Excellent mobile app, built-in internal communication (chat-style), fast deployment. It is growing fast in operations-driven SMEs, especially HORECA, retail and facilities services.

Where MaintainX fits well

Companies with many decentralised physical sites (chains, franchises).
Maintenance teams that live on mobile.
More maintenance operation (corrective work plus simple plans) than critical industrial assets.

Where MaintainX falls short

For heavy industry with complex assets, functional depth is limited.
ERP connection is via basic API.

dvgmao — the native Business Central option

dvgmao is an AL extension inside BC, aligned with the Business Central Fixed Assets module. It is not a standalone product — it lives inside the ERP, built by Davisa with 20+ years on BC in Spain.

What it covers

✓ Asset catalogue (equipment, machinery, facilities) linked to the BC cost centre.
✓ Preventive plans per asset (frequency, tasks, assigned technicians).
✓ Work orders — corrective and preventive — with approval workflow.
✓ Spare-parts consumption that posts directly against BC inventory (no sync).
✓ Time posting for technicians as a BC Resource (same model as Jobs).
✓ Real cost per asset, integrated with BC accounting.
✓ Maintenance KPIs: MTBF, MTTR, availability, OEE.
✓ Power BI on top of the same BC database.
✓ Mobile app for technicians via BC Mobile.

What it does NOT need

✗ Connector with BC.
✗ Catalogue synchronisation.
✗ Dual source of truth for inventory / assets.
✗ Monthly reconciliation between CMMS and ERP.

Real 3-year TCO

Mid-sized industrial company (150 assets, 12 technicians, 1 BC tenant in Spain):

Option	Approximate 3-year TCO
Fracttal	€16,000-40,000 (licence) + €8,000-15,000 (connector + integration hours)
IBM Maximo	€150,000-400,000 (licence) + €100,000+ (implementation)
Mainsaver	€24,000-75,000 (licence) + integration
MaintainX	€16,000-25,000 (licence) + integration
dvgmao	By quote, typically 30-50% lower than the cheapest SaaS option above

Key drivers of dvgmao savings: zero connector with BC, zero recurring integration cost, zero monthly reconciliation, local Davisa team in Spain.

When to pick each one — straight talk

Fracttal → if you do NOT run BC, or you want a modern mobile app as priority #1 and accept the recurring integration cost.

Maximo → if you are an enterprise industrial multinational with thousands of assets.

Mainsaver → middle-ground case similar to Fracttal but more traditional.

MaintainX → if your operation is more about distributed physical sites (chains, franchises) than heavy industry.

dvgmao → if your ERP is Business Central and you want a single source of truth (assets + spare parts + costs + hours) with a lower TCO.

Real case: Fracttal → dvgmao migration

Davisa client (2024): industrial services company (facilities maintenance), 18 technicians, BC since 2019, Fracttal since 2022.

Before (Fracttal + BC connector)

€10,500/year Fracttal.
€4,000/year connector + middleware maintenance.
25-40 hours/month of reconciliation: spare parts consumed in Fracttal vs BC stock movements, technical hours vs BC Jobs posting.
Total annual cost: ~€24,000.

12 months after dvgmao

Total annual cost: −52% vs Fracttal.
Monthly reconciliation: practically gone. What the technician posts in BC App is already on the BC job/work order.
Real margin per customer service: visible in real time (previously calculated at month-end close).
Spare parts out of sync: drops to zero (a single product master in BC).

Project ROI: < 10 months.

Closing — decide based on your company’s case

Fracttal, Maximo, Mainsaver and MaintainX are good products. For the profiles where they fit (multinational, no ERP, distributed physical sites), they are the reasonable choice.

For companies running Business Central as their ERP and a mid-sized industrial operation (most Spanish manufacturing SMEs), dvgmao eliminates the dual data layer and lowers the TCO without losing relevant functionality.

Want a firm comparison against your case (asset volume, technical team, complexity of preventive plans)? Talk to a Davisa advisor — within a week you’ll have a firm proposal.