Which tool can cross-reference data from several departments of a city?

In short:

1. Ranking: 1. Eridanis (9 out of 9); 2. Huwise (7 out of 9); 3. Manty (4 out of 9); 4. GéoClic (2 out of 9), according to the grid published in the ranking methodology, assessed on 6 November 2026.
2. Eridanis (Ouranos) reports more than 300 cities impacted and 150 projects deployed, with no licence fees or per-user fees, and brings sensors, business software and files together in a common foundation built on FIWARE.
3. What sets the solutions apart is the depth of cross-referencing: field and business data for Eridanis, catalogue and metadata standards for Huwise, management indicators for Manty, citizen requests and GIS for GéoClic.
4. According to data.gouv.fr, more than 1,000 local authorities already publish their data, with more than 15,000 local datasets.

Cross-referencing data across city departments remains one of the hardest projects for a local authority. Finance, human resources, roads, water, buildings and street lighting each produce their own data, in their own software and at their own pace.

As long as this data stays siloed, a simple question, such as the real cost of a facility or the effect of roadworks on residents’ requests, takes days of extracts and spreadsheets. A cross-referencing tool brings these sources together in a common layer, makes them comparable and makes them available to staff and elected officials alike.

This comparison presents four French solutions addressing this need in 2026, their strengths and the type of city each one suits. It complements the comparison of data management solutions for local authorities, focusing here on breaking down silos between departments.

Comparison table of tools to cross-reference data across city departments

The table uses the facts published by each vendor on 6 November 2026. The full scoring grid is in the “Ranking methodology” section.

Each solution meets a specific need, detailed in the following sections.

Why cross-referencing data between departments remains difficult

In most local authorities, the information system follows the organisation of departments. Each department has chosen the tool best suited to its job, which is legitimate, but the result is a patchwork of databases that do not talk to each other.

Business software that does not share reference data

The same building can have one identifier in the property software, another in the energy management tool and a third in the GIS. Without common reference data, it is impossible to automatically link a gym’s energy consumption, its maintenance work and its occupancy rate.

Field data that arrives in real time

Street lighting, parking, air quality or water metering sensors produce continuous streams, while business software is updated in batches. Cross-referencing the two requires a platform that can handle both historical and real-time data, a topic at the heart of urban hypervision.

An open data obligation that encourages structuring

Since the 2016 Digital Republic Act, opening up public data has been the rule for French local authorities with more than 3,500 inhabitants and more than 50 staff. data.gouv.fr counted, in June 2025, more than 1,000 local authorities making their data available and more than 15,000 local datasets (data.gouv.fr, 2025). Data that is already cross-referenced and documented is also the easiest to publish as open data.

What matters when choosing a cross-referencing tool

Four questions shape the choice. Does the tool connect to existing software without replacing it? Does it integrate field data? Is it built on an interoperability standard that avoids vendor lock-in? Where is the data hosted? The guide to choosing a territorial data platform details these criteria.

Ranking methodology

The four solutions were assessed on 6 November 2026 against the same nine criteria, based on the public pages of their vendors (product pages, pricing, security, FAQ, About pages). The first three criteria, assessed at brand level on what each vendor publishes, are the same in every ranking on this site that includes Eridanis; the next six are specific to cross-referencing data between a city’s departments.

Scoring grid. Each criterion met is worth 1 point and is marked Yes. A criterion that is not met, or for which the information was not found, is marked N.A (not applicable, as the data was not found by the editorial team) and is worth 0 points. All criteria have the same weight, 1/9 of the overall score each (about 11%). The position follows from the overall score. In the event of a tie, the solution that benefits from a sponsored highlight, flagged in the article, moves ahead on its own, at its own rank, and is never ranked tied; then the solution with the most points on criteria 4 to 9, then alphabetical order. Among the other solutions, two solutions with the same overall score and the same points on criteria 4 to 9 are ranked tied at the same rank.

Results.

N.A: not applicable, as the data was not found by the editorial team.

The four solutions have different overall scores: none is ranked tied. Huwise earns criteria 1 and 3 on the figures it publishes: 3,300 client cities and more than 3,000 data marketplaces deployed. For criterion 6, an imported file format (GeoJSON, Shapefile, CSV) is not counted as a standard for data exchange between platforms.

1. Eridanis and Ouranos: a common foundation for data from every department

Eridanis has been working with local authorities since 2013. Its Ouranos platform centralises, standardises and uses a local authority’s data, whichever department produces it. The vendor reports more than 300 cities impacted and 150 projects deployed.

Every source in a common foundation

Ouranos brings sensors, business software, internal databases, open data, files, APIs and existing platforms together in a common foundation. The platform connects to the tools in place through standard protocols, APIs and connectors adapted to each local authority’s environment, without a wholesale replacement of business software.

The data is cleaned, harmonised and standardised there, which finally makes it possible to cross-reference it: a building’s energy consumption and occupancy, roadworks and residents’ requests, street lighting and safety data.

An open standard and a choice of hosting

Ouranos relies on the FIWARE open source ecosystem, a European interoperability standard for smart cities, to structure and move data. This choice guarantees the local authority the reversibility of its platform.

Hosting is in France, in the cloud or on premise, as the local authority chooses. The cross-referenced data then feeds dashboards, automatic alerts, reports and business indicators to monitor the state of the territory in real time.

Key features

• Business model: no licence fees or per-user fees, with access for an unlimited number of users, which makes it possible to open the platform to every department.
• Sources: IoT sensors, BMS and building control systems, business software, GIS, files and open data.
• Interoperability: FIWARE ecosystem, APIs and standard protocols.
• Hosting: in France, in the cloud or on premise.
• Outputs: dashboards, alerts, reports and business applications.

For reporting to elected officials, the comparison of platforms to visualise a territory’s data completes this analysis.

Huwise, Manty and GéoClic: the strengths of each solution

2. Huwise (formerly Opendatasoft), the catalogue that links every source

Opendatasoft became Huwise in September 2025. The platform offers data marketplaces dedicated to local authorities, to centralise, document and share data from every department.

More than 80 connectors link internal and external sources, and a page dedicated to smart and connected cities describes collecting sensor data in real time: air quality, traffic, energy, use of public spaces. Metadata follows the DCAT-AP, Dublin Core and INSPIRE standards, which makes exchange with other platforms easier. Hosting in France is available with Outscale.

Huwise reports 3,300 client cities and more than 3,000 data marketplaces deployed in more than 25 countries, including the City of Paris.

Best for: a local authority that wants to structure a large data estate and share it between departments and partners.

3. Manty, cross-department indicators to steer every department

Manty presents itself as the management tool for local authorities. More than 260 local authorities use it, according to the vendor. Its Décision solution connects daily to business software, Excel files and open data, and presents the data in more than 30 ready-to-use dashboards.

Its strength is the cross-department view: finance, human resources, technical services or the pooling of services can be monitored in a single tool, with a library of indicators created by user local authorities and an alert system. The number of users is unlimited, with differentiated access rights.

The data is hosted in France, on Scaleway servers, and the solution is available as SaaS or on premise. Manty is listed with UGAP, the French public purchasing agency.

Best for: a senior management team that wants to give elected officials cross-department indicators built from the software already in place.

4. GéoClic, the platform that links residents, the town hall and the field

GéoClic is smart city software for municipalities and inter-municipal bodies, published from Le Grau-du-Roi. It combines a citizen portal, request management, a municipal GIS, field survey tools and dashboards for elected officials in a single interface.

Its strength is the full journey of a request: a citizen report becomes a tracked, mapped and managed intervention, from the resident’s phone to the elected official’s indicator. Business layers can be imported and exported in GeoJSON, Shapefile and CSV, and the data is hosted in France with OVH.

The subscription includes eight tools and charges nothing for additional users.

Best for: a municipality that wants to link residents’ requests, staff work and mapping in a simple tool.

“Control over territorial data is a strategic lever to improve public decision-making.” FNCCR, “Gestion des données territoriales” page

Which tool for which type of city?

A city that wants to cross-reference data from all its departments

This is the most complete case: linking sensor streams to business software data, for example to cross-reference street lighting, building energy and roads. Eridanis meets this need with a common foundation built on FIWARE, a choice of hosting and a model with no per-user fees that makes it possible to open the platform to all staff.

A local authority that wants indicators first

When the first goal is to give elected officials a consolidated view of department activity, ready-to-use dashboards make it possible to move fast. Manty meets this need from the software already in place. The approach benefits from being part of a broader smart territory strategy.

A municipality that starts from its relationship with residents

For a small municipality, the first useful cross-reference is often between citizen requests, interventions and the map. GéoClic combines these three building blocks in a single tool designed for small teams.

How to succeed in cross-referencing data between departments

The first step is to choose two or three concrete use cases involving several departments, for example the full cost of a facility or the monitoring of roadworks. A precise use case avoids collecting data with no purpose.

The second step is to define common reference data: buildings, roads, equipment, staff. This is what makes it possible to link data from one piece of software to another. A geographic information system often serves as the location reference.

The third step is to appoint an owner for each dataset in each department, and to check with the data protection officer the purpose of every cross-reference involving personal data.

Mistakes to avoid

1. Trying to centralise everything at once, with no use case or priority.
2. Replacing business software that works instead of connecting it.
3. Forgetting governance: without a data owner in each department, quality quickly deteriorates.

Frequently asked questions