2025 is not a year for half measures. Since v26 (2025 Wave 1), a clear, staged path applies to many scenarios: for the cloud migration, your on-prem solution has to be brought to at least v25; v26 is also a stepping-stone release, which means direct jumps across several major versions are restricted. That affects budget, downtime and tool selection – noticeably so.
These are your options for the upgrade.
1) Greenfield
Only important master data (customers, vendors, items, open balances where applicable) plus new processes/customizing in Business Central.
Advantages: Lean, fast, less legacy baggage.
Disadvantages: History remains in the legacy system/archive; additional effort for reporting across the old and the new system.
2) Complete data transfer
The full history (master data and transaction data) moves to Business Central.
Advantages: One system, full ability to provide information.
Disadvantages: Technically more complex, larger data volume and therefore typically longer switchover windows, more testing.
The options at a glance
Option
Type / approach
Suitable for
Parallel operation with Live-Sync
Go-live downtime (for technical reasons)
Notes
Configuration packages (RapidStart)
Data transfer via Excel/package; built into BC
“Greenfield” (master data, basic configuration)
No
Importing larger data volumes can block the system; not suitable for live production
For initial setup; XMLports are the better choice for bulk imports; since 2024/25 BLOB and multi-line text are possible via Base64
DataMigrate Pro (IO Integrated)
Direct migration including bidirectional synchronization, delta loads
“Greenfield” and complete transfer
Yes – NAV & BC in parallel, Live-Sync
Very low; you choose the switchover time
Supports very old NAV versions; target cloud or on-prem; no jump versions required (vendor information)
Third-party providers (typically your Dynamics NAV & Navision partner)
Project service on the Microsoft standard path (C/AL→AL, upgrade toolkit, data upgrade); clean start including data migration
Clean start or complete transfer
No (no Live-Sync)
Yes – the data upgrade requires a maintenance window; one-way street
Test and production data migration; custom tables optional
Note: why is the standard path a “one-way street”? During the Microsoft data upgrade all clients are disconnected; after a successful data upgrade, renewed replication from the old version is not permitted (risk of data corruption). This is a technical constraint and applies regardless of which service provider carries out the upgrade.
Strengths & weaknesses in detail
Configuration packages (formerly "RapidStart")
Pros:
- Built in, cost-effective, fast for master data (customers, vendors, items, basic G/L setup).
- Since 2024/25: BLOB and multi-line text can be processed through a package (Base64).
Cons:
- Not intended for existing production companies; large imports can block usage - use XMLports for bulk imports.
- No Live-Sync, no history conversion (import only), testing/troubleshooting often manual.
- Transfer of entries or of posted / unposted documents (e.g. invoices) is not possible
- Very slow with large data volumes
- Configuration packages have to be imported in the correct order, otherwise validation errors occur (with links between tables)
Conclusion: ideal for a “greenfield” start. Unsuitable for a complete data transfer (including posted entries and documents), or at least laborious and slow.
DataMigrate Pro (IO Integrated)
Pros:
- Direct migration from very old Navision/NAV versions without "jump versions"
- Bidirectional live synchronization (NAV↔BC), delta loads, parallel operation - resulting in minimal / no downtime and a Cutover you can plan.
- Target cloud or on-prem; suitable for greenfield (subset) and for complete transfer.
Cons:
- Extensive features that mostly work via a command line tool. This may require a short introduction to their use.
Conclusion: technically attractive if downtime is to be minimized and the legacy history is to be carried over in full.
Service provider on the Microsoft standard path
Pros:
- Use of the standard upgrade path
Cons:
- Cutover‑downtime is inherent to the system: during the data upgrade all connections are cut; after that replication is no longer permitted - a one-way street.
- For BC Online / SaaS the OnPrem system must be at least v25 -> additional intermediate steps may be required.
- Most expensive solution (usually between 50.000 and 150.000 EUR)
Conclusion: if a long downtime and high costs are not a problem, then this approach is an acceptable solution.
Specifics you should not ignore
- Cloud migration only from v25 - before the move to the cloud, an update to v25 is required; v26 acts as a stepping‑stone release.
- Data upgrade = maintenance window - regardless of the service provider, clients are disconnected until the step is complete; going back with renewed replication is not supported. A classic one-way street. That is no longer up to date.
- Configuration packages are not a bulk ETL tool - for bulk imports in production, Microsoft advises against packages (performance risk) and points to XMLports instead.
Decision matrix (short and to the point)
Risks & pitfalls that hurt
- Downtime underestimated: in a standard upgrade the data upgrade step is a hard cut; if you have to plan to the minute, you need clean advance tests or you choose Live-Sync.
- Data quality: duplicates, wrong number series, faulty dimensions blow up in the new system. Plan data cleansing early.
- Add‑ons/customizing: C/AL‑customizations must be transferred cleanly to AL/Extensions; the effort depends on the scope of the legacy system.
- Configuration packages are overestimated: good for master data - not as a history-capable ETL or during ongoing production.
Checklist: how to make the right decision (in 30 minutes)
- Does BC have to be online? If so and you are on < v25, plan for an intermediate step to v25 (the older the source version, the more intermediate steps are needed) or check direct migration/Live-Sync.
- How much history do you need in BC? Master data only -> RapidStart; full history -> DataMigrate Pro or a standard upgrade with a Go-live window and long downtimes.
- Downtime tolerance: none / hardly any tolerance -> Livesync; weekend Cutover and high costs acceptable -> standard upgrade.
- NAV version very old? Direct migration without intermediate versions saves time/complexity.
- Budget/responsibility model: technically driven & migration-focused -> DataMigrate Pro.
See also the official documentation from Microsoft.
Conclusion
- Greenfield: set up configuration packages for master data and processes from scratch. Fast and cost-effective - but not for bulk imports in live operation.
- Complete data transfer: when downtime is critical and costs are to be kept low, or when the source version is very old: DataMigrate Pro (parallel operation, Live-Sync).
- Classic Cutover window acceptable and fixed price/standard important: Business Central partner (such as IO Integrated) - accept that the data upgrade is a one-way street and that the costs can escalate.
