We performed a comparison between AWS Step Functions and KiSSFLOW based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is stable...The solution is easy to scale."
"It's a general solution that you can adapt to your own needs and is simple to use. We like that it can be integrated with everything in the AWS suite, and that the creation of the pipeline can be done using the graphical user interface."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The integration capability is easy, whereas building state machines is tricky."
"The number of historical events is great."
"AWS Step Functions acts as a high-level layer, allowing us to seamlessly integrate with microservices."
"It's Amazon, it's scalable."
"One can rate all the calls and that is a good feature."
"The best thing about KiSSFLOW is that we can do virtual approvals."
"The support team responds fast."
"Kissflow is intuitive and easy to use, and I haven't faced any errors using the solution so far."
"The flexibility and speed in modifying and creating processes are great features. If we have a process in mind, we can usually create it within ten minutes."
"I work in HR and am fond of automation. I like the tool's email automation and integration with Outlook."
"The best thing is the no-code part. Even a person without experience with the coding language can easily understand and build the processes."
"I like the forms which help us to get information."
"The most valuable feature is the performance."
"The price and support are areas with shortcomings where the solution needs to improve."
"The interface can sometimes feel limited, as we're unable to see what AWS is running behind the scenes."
"It is hard to coordinate the declaratory language."
"It wasn't easy to understand the licensing model. It's like if you use just a little, it's cheap, but it becomes more expensive as you use more. It's like a hook that ties you inside the Amazon ecosystem. So, it creates a dependency."
"The solution's data size limit can be improved."
"The solution's pricing could be cheaper. It is cheaper than Airflow."
"The pricing of the solution can be improved."
"Setup took about one day. We had some errors to understand in the beginning, but now everything is working good."
"There is a lag in the delay between API calls."
"Sometimes some notifications don't appear on the mobile app."
"The UI, though is pretty friendly and easy to use, can be improved in some aspects."
"There is room for improvement in terms of stability."
"KiSSFLOW needs to improve its integration."
"In future releases, it would be interesting to have a repository or portal within KiSSFLOW where users can interact with the KiSSFLOW community."
"Some of the tool's fields only accept certain types of text. The input fields are inflexible."
"The integration between forms should be made easier."
AWS Step Functions is ranked 12th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 9 reviews while KiSSFLOW is ranked 10th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 12 reviews. AWS Step Functions is rated 7.8, while KiSSFLOW is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS Step Functions writes "Simplifies complex task automation and enhances development workflows while offering user-friendly interface, seamless scalability and efficient workflow orchestration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of KiSSFLOW writes "The tool is intuitive to use and, through automation, has been a real time-saver". AWS Step Functions is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Apache Airflow, Pega BPM and Oracle BPM, whereas KiSSFLOW is most compared with Camunda, Microsoft Power Apps, ServiceNow, Nintex Process Platform and Appian. See our AWS Step Functions vs. KiSSFLOW report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.