iceDQ vs Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector)
Verdict: iceDQ scores 8.2/10 against 7.9/10 for Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) on our data score for power BI report testing tools.
Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) has a free plan; iceDQ does not.
iceDQ and Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) lead on 1 check each; 3 are even, out of 5 checks (yes/no, price and seats) where we have data for both.
Choose iceDQ for enterprise QA and data teams testing ETL pipelines, migrations and BI reports. Choose Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) for power BI developers enforcing report standards in Azure DevOps or GitHub pipelines.
Scoreboard: 5 checks
| Check | iceDQ | Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Leads | |
| Free trial | Leads | |
| Smaller seat minimum | Even | Even |
| Power BI | Even | Even |
| CI/CD integration | Even | Even |
| Total | 1 | 1 |
At a glance
| iceDQ | Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 8.2/10 (#1) | 7.9/10 (#5) |
| Best for | Enterprise QA and data teams testing ETL pipelines, migrations and BI reports | Power BI developers enforcing report standards in Azure DevOps or GitHub pipelines |
| Free plan | No | Yes |
| Paid from (annual) | See vendor | See vendor |
| Paid from (monthly) | — | — |
| Free trial | Free trial offered via demo request (length not stated) | — |
| Minimum seats | 1 | 1 |
| Platforms | Cloud (SaaS on AWS), On-premises (self-managed) | Windows, macOS, Docker |
Features
| Tool | Score | Power BI | Report data validated against source | Report regression testing | Report performance testing | CI/CD integration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| iceDQ Featured partner | 8.2/10 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Not confirmed | Yes |
| Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) | 7.9/10 | Yes | Not confirmed | Not confirmed | Not confirmed | Yes |
- Only iceDQ confirms: Report data validated against source, Report regression testing.
Pros and cons
iceDQ
Pros- Connectors page lists 150+ native and SQL-based connectors, including Snowflake, Databricks, Google BigQuery, SAP HANA, Salesforce, Kafka and mainframe AS400
- Tests BI reports against their source data; the BI testing page names Power BI, Tableau, Qlik Sense, MicroStrategy, SAP BusinessObjects and IBM Cognos, and Power BI testing supports XMLA and native DAX queries
- File testing covers CSV, JSON, XML, Excel, fixed-width, Parquet, Avro and mainframe EBCDIC/COBOL files, read from S3, ADLS Gen2, Google Cloud Storage, FTP/SFTP and SharePoint
- Integrations page lists 20+ pre-built integrations: Jenkins, Bamboo, Azure DevOps, GitHub Actions, Airflow, Autosys, Control-M, Jira, ServiceNow, HP ALM, Xray and Zephyr
- Offered as SaaS on AWS or self-managed on-premises; the vendor says the customer controls data access in both
- No published prices; the license is described only as consumption-based per user per server or enterprise, and every page leads to 'Book a Demo'
- No free plan; the 'Free Trial' card on the homepage links to the demo request form and gives no trial length or terms
- Many connectors cost extra: the licensing policy lists JSON, XML, Parquet, Avro, REST API, GraphQL, Salesforce and Kafka as premium data connectors, Power BI, Tableau Cloud and Qlik Cloud as premium BI connectors, and Azure DevOps, GitHub Actions and Jira as premium integrations
- For Tableau and Qlik, the connectors page and licensing policy list only Tableau Cloud and Qlik Cloud; Cognos is named on the BI testing page but not in the connector list
- Aimed at data teams rather than API developers: there is no load testing or API mocking, and the vendor itself says it checks the data in API responses rather than replacing functional tools like Postman
Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector)
Pros- Free and open source (MIT license)
- Outputs Azure DevOps task commands or GitHub Actions annotations for pipeline gating
- Rules can include DAX query and T-SQL query conditions, not only layout checks
- Runs against local item folders or published Fabric workspaces
- Community project, not supported by Microsoft
- Does not read PBIX files; reports must be saved as PBIP / PBIR folders
- Rules are written as JSON, which takes time to learn; base rules focus on report visual quality
Frequently asked questions
How do iceDQ and Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) compare on features and price?
iceDQ and Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) lead on 1 check each; 3 are even, out of 5 checks (yes/no, price and seats) where we have data for both.
Is iceDQ better than Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector)?
iceDQ scores 8.2/10 against 7.9/10 for Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) on our data score for power BI report testing tools. iceDQ is best for enterprise QA and data teams testing ETL pipelines, migrations and BI reports; Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) is best for power BI developers enforcing report standards in Azure DevOps or GitHub pipelines.
Which is cheaper, iceDQ or Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector)?
Check each vendor's pricing page; one of them does not publish an entry price.
Do iceDQ and Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector) have free plans?
iceDQ: no. Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector): yes.
See the full Power BI Report Testing Tools ranking for other options.
Sources
- iceDQ: official pricing page · iceDQ homepage · iceDQ platform overview (deployment and license FAQ) · iceDQ features · iceDQ connectors · iceDQ integrations · iceDQ licensing policy · iceDQ ETL testing · iceDQ data testing tool · iceDQ data reconciliation · iceDQ BI report testing · iceDQ Power BI testing · iceDQ file testing · iceDQ data monitoring · iceDQ data observability · iceDQ API data testing · iceDQ about us
- Fab Inspector (formerly PBI Inspector): official pricing page · Fab Inspector GitHub README · PBI Inspector (original) GitHub repository