Compare
Cirium vs OAG
OAG's own comparison is to Cirium directly — both license aviation schedule and status data, but Cirium's remit extends further into fleet and tracking.
Side by side
| Cirium | OAG | |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Cirium (part of LexisNexis Risk Solutions, a RELX business) | OAG Aviation Worldwide Limited |
| Pricing model | Quote only | Quote only |
| Free tier | No | No |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Open source | No | No |
| Best for | Airlines, airports, lessors, and travel technology companies needing licensed aviation schedule, fleet, and tracking data. | Airlines, airports, and travel technology firms needing licensed schedule, capacity, and status data for route and network analysis. |
| Pricing | No published pricing; Cirium licenses aviation data and analytics through direct contact rather than self-service tiers. Pricing has not been verified yet — see the vendor's site. | No published pricing; OAG offers a 'try our data' option but final access and licensing are arranged through direct sales contact. Pricing has not been verified yet — see the vendor's site. |
| Features |
|
|
Verdict
OAG's tool record names Cirium as its closest competitor, and the overlap is real: both are enterprise aviation-data providers delivering flight schedules, status and historical data via API to airlines, airports and travel-technology companies, both are quote-priced through direct sales, and both are owned by larger information conglomerates (Cirium by RELX via LexisNexis Risk Solutions; OAG independently but with similar enterprise-data positioning). The difference is breadth. OAG's core strength is schedule data specifically — more than 900 airlines, updated roughly every 15 minutes, with over 20 years of historical schedules, delivered with a notable Snowflake data-share integration. Cirium covers schedules too, but extends further into live flight tracking, a global aircraft fleet database, passenger traffic data and aircraft emissions data, making it the broader aviation-data platform of the two.
Choose OAG if
- Schedule data specifically — current, historical or airfare-adjacent — is the primary need, and you want deep historical depth (20+ years) and frequent update cycles.
- You already use Snowflake and want data delivered as a data share rather than only via API.
- Seating-capacity data alongside schedules matters for your route or network analysis.
Choose Cirium if
- You need flight tracking and fleet data in addition to schedules, not schedules alone.
- Emissions and aircraft-utilization data are part of the requirement — increasingly relevant for airline sustainability reporting.
- Being part of a larger risk-and-data infrastructure group (LexisNexis Risk Solutions) is a plus for procurement or data-governance reasons.
What they share
Neither publishes pricing; both license data and analytics through direct sales contact rather than self-service tiers, consistent with enterprise aviation-data agreements generally. Both deliver via API and dashboard rather than requiring a full consulting engagement to get started. If your need extends beyond schedules and tracking into aggregate booking-demand intelligence, see Amadeus Travel Intelligence, which draws on a different data source (global distribution system bookings) than either of these.
Last reviewed September 22, 2026