Comparing SAP IBP and o9 Digital Brain

SAP and o9 both target the same strategic problem: how to turn supply chains into agile, data-driven engines for growth. Despite having the same goal, both vendors approach this challenge from different directions. SAP presents an ERP-centric execution backbone, while o9 uses an AI-native planning “brain”.

Integrated Planning from SAP

SAP’s core planning offering is Integrated Business Planning (SAP IBP), a cloud solution on SAP HANA that unifies S&OP, demand planning, inventory optimization, and response and supply planning in one platform. Tight integration with SAP S/4HANA and supply chain integration add‑ons enables near real‑time transfer of master and transactional data, so plans can drive production, procurement, and fulfillment with minimal manual touch.

For SAPinsiders this means that they have a single data model spanning finance, supply chain, and operations supporting integrated business planning and scenario analysis. SAP also provides embedded analytics, AI-supported forecasting, and demand sensing that sit natively in the broader SAP application landscape.

o9’s Digital Brain

o9 positions its platform as an AI‑powered “Digital Brain” that creates a knowledge‑driven digital twin of the end‑to‑end supply chain, from suppliers to customers. The platform emphasizes real‑time ingestion of ERP, IoT, and external data, advanced optimization solvers, and rich what‑if scenario planning across demand, supply, and operations.

The key values for o9 customers include event‑driven, continuous planning that senses disruptions and dynamically rebalances supply, inventory, and capacity. o9 also offers a unified planning workspace that connects S&OP, supply, distribution, and even commercial or product teams in a single collaborative environment.

Similarities and Differences

Both vendors aim to provide end‑to‑end planning coverage including demand forecasting, supply and inventory planning, and S&OP/IBP‑style consensus processes. Other crucial features include real‑time visibility and analytics via control‑tower‑like capabilities to detect risks and enable faster decision making. And both vendors include AI and machine learning for forecasting accuracy, demand sensing, and automated decision recommendations.

However, despite the overlaps, the strategic emphasis differs. SAP IBP is optimized for organizations standardizing on SAP S/4HANA and seeking a deeply integrated planning‑to‑execution stack. o9 is more ERP‑agnostic, often layered as a best‑of‑breed planning brain over SAP and non‑SAP backbones. Solutions from o9 are frequently regarded as highly configurable with rapid scenario modeling. SAP IBP, by contrast, offers best practice templates but can be perceived as being tied to SAP’s governance models.

For SAPinsiders, migration away from legacy SAP APO has opened a window for o9, which explicitly targets APO replacements and has even filed a trade‑secret complaint alleging SAP used o9 concepts in IBP, underscoring the intensity of competition in this segment.

Recent Friction

Complicating the picture for customers, in November 2025, o9 Solutions filed a complaint against SAP alleging that three former o9 leaders engaged in a coordinated effort to include o9’s confidential intellectual property in SAP’s planning and AI portfolio. The executives at the center of the complaint are Stephan de Barse, formerly o9’s Chief Revenue Officer; Stijn Pieter van Houten, a senior figure in knowledge innovation; and Sean Zonneveld, a global senior vice president.

The complaint alleges that, in the months before and around their departures from o9, the three executives downloaded and accessed thousands of internal files including technical documentation, product strategy materials, and detailed customer information. o9 contends that these documents helped SAP sharpen its messaging and accelerate development in AI driven planning and adjacent capabilities.

SAP has publicly rejected the accusation that it used a competitor’s trade secrets, maintaining that its supply chain and planning roadmap is the result of its own long-running investments and strategy. SAPinsider will continue to follow the story.

What This Means for SAPinsiders

Design around your planning “center of gravity”. If SAP S/4HANA is the operational backbone, SAP IBP offers a native path for integrated planning, leveraging a single data model, embedded analytics, and governance aligned with core ERP. For organizations with diverse ERPs or fast changing businesses, o9’s Digital Brain can be positioned as the primary planning layer that federates data from multiple systems while still feeding execution back into SAP.

Match use cases to each platform’s strengths. Use SAP IBP where you need standard, process driven IBP/S&OP, tight financial integration, and predictable templates that align with SAP best practices. Bring in o9 for cross enterprise scenario modeling, event driven replanning, and complex multi-tier optimization that spans suppliers, plants, and commercial teams, treating it as a specialized engine for the toughest planning problems.

Be deliberate about coexistence patterns. Many SAPinsiders will end up with a hybrid landscape where some planning processes sit in SAP IBP and others in o9. Define clear ownership for data (master and planning), decision rights, and “system of decision” by process so you do not duplicate scenarios, KPIs, or workflows across both tools. Then build integration so that whichever platform you choose for a specific process becomes the authoritative driver of downstream execution in SAP.