Bizagi Reviews

We adopted Bizagi for an Agile project. We involved users by participating in whiteboarding sessions.

The user interface is very good, making it easy for business people to understand. The speed to deploy is efficient, making it easy to adopt. The toolset is intuitive, so we didn’t need their support much. It helped engage users in sessions effectively.

Governance is lacking, as with many easy-to-use tools. The scalability could be improved as well. For more mature environments, the integration to live systems is lacking, which affects its applicability.

In the last 12 months, I did not deal with Bizagi, but my experience with it is longer than that.

In terms of stability, it did the job for us.

If I rate scalability from one to ten, I would probably give it a six. It could be better with scaling.

They mostly offer online email support and do not have phone support. The toolset is very intuitive, so we didn’t need to contact their support much. I feel comfortable saying it is 'not applicable' because we didn't reach out for their support.

Neutral

Currently, my role involves using a tool from SAP.

The initial setup was easy and not too complex.

We provided it to all the architects and business analysts, and they used it in sessions with the business.

Bizagi's pricing is very aggressive, and it was one of the reasons we chose it. It was less expensive than some of the other tools.

In the last 12 months, I have not dealt with any tools besides Sparx. I have heard about others like Teradata a long time ago.

I would recommend Bizagi depending on the maturity of the organization. For those just starting, it's a good tool to get into business modeling. In more mature environments, I might not pick this toolset because it doesn't integrate with live systems well. Overall, I would rate Bizagi between eight to nine.

Basically, it is a kind of approval mechanism for financial budget reviews. Every year, each department of the functional unit verticals gets some budget. On top of the budget, they will submit the expenditure. All the expenditures will route to the right reviewers upon approval. It will be routed to the financial department for further clearance.

It is open source. That is the main advantage, and it does not require any kind of license. For small and mid-range requirements, we can go ahead with Bijacki. Compared to Bonita and Camunda, there are not many basic workflow orchestration modalities. That is their selling point. It is definitely a cost-saving and time-saving solution. It improves visibility and quality, and basically, it avoids human errors.

Definitely, right now, it is purely open source, and we don't have much community support. If they add a few more capabilities like AIML and DocGen AI, these features would be good. Reporting capabilities can be improved more, and community support should be increased. Otherwise, people cannot onboard that particular technology easily.

I have worked for two years on this particular Bizagi.

I don't see anything like that.

There is no direct scalability option. We can install the same, and using a load balancer, we can improve the scalability features.

I would rate it as an eight out of ten. It is a community product, there is not much support we can expect. Everything relies mostly on the community, user community, and freelancers who post improvements and all. We cannot expect major customer support.

Positive

Compared to Bonita and Camunda, there are not many basic workflow orchestration modalities. That is their selling point.

The setup is straightforward. There is no complexity in that. I can do it myself.

I would say it provides a 30% return on investment.

I can say it is a kind of Java platform. We can integrate with any kind of system using simple Java code. The overall product rating is nine out of ten.

Bizagi process automation platform has helped my company enhance operational efficiency, though I have only used it for developing process maps.

I am the only person using it in my company as far as I know. Other people create process maps using Excel or other tools.

Bizagi is very simple and easy to use, which I find most valuable. It allows users to create clean and neat process maps.

I have only used the platform for developing process maps rather than automation.

I have not explored ways Bizagi can be improved beyond creating maps. If I explore automation and integration with other processes, then I may be able to identify potential areas for improvement.

I would appreciate additional features for the free version. Currently, the elements in a process map are limited to activities, decisions, flows, and start/end points. The decision map could be improved to allow more than three options at a decision point.

The installation process was very short, involving registration followed by downloading and installing the software.

The updating process for Bizagi has been fine. The updates have not interrupted anything, and I have not observed any major changes in usage or functionality.

The initial setup for Bizagi was straightforward. The downloading and installation process was simple.

I have not integrated Bizagi with other enterprise systems in my environment. I use it exclusively on my machine.

I have not explored pricing for Bizagi because I am using the free version with limited features.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Bizagi a 9.

I am a user of Bizagi and UiPath. I will continue using Bizagi just for process modeling and simulations. I have not integrated Bizagi with my existing systems such as CRM, ERP, or legacy databases because I use it as a standalone tool, so there is no integration with other software. At this time, I use Camunda, Bizagi, and Adonis, and regarding UiPath, I want to clarify that I am using them myself.

I have been generally satisfied with Bizagi because I'm quite satisfied with the free versions since I can model the process and simulate. It's not really good for process documentation because the diagram, when exported to pictures such as SVG or PNG files, the quality is not as good compared to Camunda. With Camunda, I can export in PNG or SVG, and the quality is good, especially if exported to Word or PDF or SharePoint.

The process modeling feature in Bizagi has helped in designing workflows tailored to my business needs because it's good for process modeling, but I think it's not really user-friendly because the interface is quite complicated compared to Camunda. It's similar to Excel for process modeling, with many buttons, tabs, and menus. For process simulations, it has very good features, as I can calculate or simulate the logic, and then the cost and time with Bizagi.

Bizagi is really helpful for us to justify a process improvement initiative because we can simulate a to-be process and see how much we can save time, save resources, and how a to-be or a new process can run in the correct logic based on BPMN modeling.

I would improve the interface in Bizagi, mainly because it's not really intuitive and responsive. At some occasions, it's lagging and not really good-looking. I expect that Bizagi will have more collaboration options with a more intuitive interface and web-based platforms in the future.

I have been using Bizagi for around two years.

It is easy to install Bizagi because I already have the files from older versions.

I am not planning to use the paid version for either Camunda or Bizagi in the future.

I am using the free version. I don't have an idea about Bizagi's real-time analytics and reporting capabilities because I just use the process modeler. On a scale of 1-10, I rate Bizagi an 8.

We automate some specific processes from HR, purchasing, investments, etc. I use Bizagi to develop the process documentation according to the VPN. We use the information provided to create automation in another tool, not Bizagi. We use this for modeling and documenting the whole process.

Bizagi is a natural VPN notation compliance tool. I could export my information to another vendor that uses another tool, and they wouldn't have problems importing it. I saw other products they were sending to me, and those products included some additional notations or damage that Bizagi could not read. The natural notation is the best feature of Bizagi because it makes it compatible with other products.

Bizagi's UI should include shorter steps for documenting controls, documenting properties, changing some attributes in the object, and adding additional text.

I have been using Bizagi for three years.

Bizagi is a very stable solution.

In my opinion, Bizagi is better than Sparx. The manner in which Spark operates is the same as ten years ago. Bizagi has evolved in terms of ease of use and adapting the tool. Bizagi is investing in a lot of new user experiences that Sparx is not using.

The solution’s initial setup was very easy.

The solution's deployment took less than an hour. We just launched the version. We saw that the environment was similar to other tools like Visual Studio from Microsoft or BlueWorks from IBM, and we started dropping boxes and connecting. It was very flexible and easy to understand, and we started documenting the whole thing.

Bizagi is totally free for modeling.

We are just focusing on modeling our processes. Initially, I was looking for a tool that allowed us to model and automate the processes. We had a conversation with the vendor, but Bizagi was not the tool for automating the processes because of some specific metrics in the company. Nowadays, we use Bizagi just for documentation. Bizagi is a very flexible and intuitive tool.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My main use cases for Bizagi are IDP solutions, primarily, where the UI/UX is needed, and also BPMN process has to be clearly defined.

I have used Bizagi's Process Modeler feature, using the Modeler only while Studio is being created. We are using it for each and every process even though we are not developing something in Bizagi. If we are developing it in the Power Platform, we are still doing that process mapping within Modeler only.

There is a positive impact of Bizagi on my organization. A lot of customers are moving towards Bizagi. The only challenge I see is with the licensing cost, but apart from that, it is able to handle all the processes without any issues.

Bizagi has rich functionalities; compared to other BPMN tools, it has more features.

If the licensing cost can be optimized, that will be better so more developers or more companies can adopt Bizagi.

I haven't worked to the extent to see any additional features needed in the next release of Bizagi. Over a period, I might identify certain features that are needed and should be put in place.

I have been working with Bizagi just in the past two months.

I have not had any problems while integrating Bizagi with my existing enterprise systems such as CRM, ERP, and legacy databases.

The integration and implementation is seamless; there is no issue. Till now, I haven't observed any issue.

I previously used different solutions; I currently use the Power Platform and UiPath as well.

I have chosen Bizagi because it has better features than its competitors; it has its own database, its own AI agent in place for that purpose, and we can create a process mapping and just attach the forms and UI to generate a proper process.

It is expensive compared to other tools which I have in the market.

I don't think Bizagi is the best option on the market; it depends on the process. If we have the entire Robotic Process Automation that needs to be run, then UiPath is better. But in case we need to have the proper enterprise scale application that is required to develop, where UI is there and a proper BPMN needs to be there, then definitely Bizagi is the best solution.

I would definitely recommend it for bigger companies.

Speaking about the use of Bizagi for process automation in our specific industry, I would say that we have not yet reached that level of automation, and for now, we are just using it for modeling and maybe for doing a few simulations.

Bizagi's integration capabilities have benefited our company's business processes in a smooth manner, but I can't describe it much.

The most valuable features of the solution are the process modeling part and process simulation.

The data in Excel that comes out after running the simulation is a bit complicated sometimes to interpret. It could be a bit easier just to give you an idea of the maximum time, minimum time, and average time since, currently, the tool does not offer so much granularity in the breakdown of time, work, or even the costs. The simulation could be a bit more easy.

I have been using Bizagi for seven years. I don't remember the version of the solution.

Around 100 people use the tool in my company.

My company used to use Microsoft Visio initially. As the transitions are usually gradual in nature, some people in my company still use Microsoft Visio, but the majority of them decided to learn how to use Bizagi. Compared to Visio, Bizagi's interface is good and futuristic, so it can help us with automation.

The product should offer its users the ability to link different models. In Visio, if you model a process in diagram one, then there is a connector that can take you to another model in case the specs aren't enough. In Bizagi, if you have first finished diagram one, then you open another page for diagram two, and then you have to keep going back and forth. If there is a way in which you can create a link, like when you finish one, it goes on to the next one, and it keeps linking automatically, then it would be good.

The product's implementation phase was easy.

The solution implementation process took a while to be completed.

I deployed the tool by myself.

With the product, my company is able to take care of business process modeling and also run some simulations.

My company uses the free version of the product. In our company, we are doing documentation and modeling. When we reach that point of automating the processes, then maybe we shall acquire the paid suite, which will be for automation.

Against Bizagi, my company evaluated the products from IBM. IBM wasn't user-friendly and was a bit complicated. Bizagi's UI is intuitive.

There were no issues with integrating the product within our company's existing infrastructure.

Not many people are required to maintain the product because my company has a team of about five people who help with the installation of the product on different laptops, and I have seen that it has not been given as an issue.

I am sure that the product will support my company if we take up some AI initiatives.

I would recommend the product to others.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

In most cases, I've been working with financial companies such as banks. Currently, our client is a bank. So, most of the processes we're developing are payments and support processes.

Its capability for integration and orchestration is huge. It supports a lot of languages. If Bizagi doesn't have specific native functionality, we can develop a component for Bizagi. It can integrate and orchestrate a lot of processes with other systems.

In my current project, we have just five or six processes, but in other projects, we have about 20 processes integrating with Bizagi. I know from a colleague that they have a hundred processes.

We are able to adapt processes we have created with Bizagi as our business grows and more processes are automated. That's a huge advantage of Bizagi. It can scale, and we can adapt a lot of processes. We can create new versions, and we can add functionalities, processes, activities, and integrations. It is very easy to adapt the processes we have created with Bizagi as our business grows.

It improved a lot of processes for one of the projects I have worked on. We were able to eliminate papers, translations, and a lot of other things that take a lot of time. Sometimes, we don't have to automate a big process. We can automate a tiny process, but the impact is so big.

It helps to connect stakeholders with processes. I've been working with different companies and users. It has a lot of functionalities focused on the stakeholders. In the case of the projects I've been working on, the stakeholders are continually working with the developers. They tell us their requirements, and in the life cycle of software, they participate in every step.

Most of the time, we get the benefits that we were expecting. We sometimes also have unexpected benefits. When the users get a new version of the process or new functionality, they feel great because they didn't expect that the tool could solve their problems.

It has reduced our time-to-market. It has saved a lot of time. For our processes, we have to create a lot of documents, print them, and get a lot of signs. That's the process of the company. With Bizagi, we could reduce that time by 50%. Previously, we were spending an hour printing, signing, and organizing the paper. With Bizagi automation, the process takes 10 minutes because we just have to click and fill in different fields. The time that we save is a lot.

It has reduced costs for the organization. The cost savings depend on the process. For one of the processes, the cost reduction was 150 million Colombian Pesos (COPS) per month.

It has freed up employees to do more valuable work. It has saved a lot of time spent doing manual activities. The time saved varies from process to process. For the payment process, the time was reduced from 30 days to 10 days.

Agility is most valuable because we can develop so much faster than other tools. We can make requirements, develop, and go out to production much faster. So, agility in the software cycle is most valuable.

Its integrations are good. In most cases, Bizagi is not the core of the company, and it has to integrate with other systems, which is easy. It has a lot of tools for integration. It has its own web services such as SOAP. Bizagi is so much easier to integrate because it exposes its own services, and it can consume web services from another system.

We have migrated to the cloud, but there are a lot of issues while integrating with the cloud. There are a lot of things to improve with the cloud and reporting. We were previously working with on-premise solutions, and we had access to a lot of things, but with the cloud, they changed a lot of functionalities. Some of the things we know, but with some of the things, we are having difficulties.

They have been working with apps. They have been launching new apps and widgets, but there are a lot of bugs in new functionalities, new widgets, and even new versions. That's an area where they need to improve.

I've been using Bizagi for nine years in different roles. In a company where I was working, they bought Bizagi, and I started as a user. After that, I became a developer, and now, I'm a functional and technical consultant.

The functionality we are using is somewhat stable, but when they have new functionalities, new widgets, or even a new version, they have a lot of bugs and it seems that the users are their QA team. We have to report a lot of things, but that's mostly in new versions. When we have a stable version, we don't have a lot of bugs, but when we want to try new things, there are a lot of bugs.

Scalability is a big advantage of Bizagi. It can be scaled. With the cloud version, they have to provide the infrastructure to scale our processes. When it was on-premises, the company had the responsibility to expand the infrastructure. In some cases, they didn't have the money, and it became difficult to operate.

Currently, we have three developers and two users to check that everything is okay with the process deployments. In total, we have five people.

It depends on the subscription. They have different levels of technical support. Sometimes, we create a ticket, and they take a week or a few days to respond. With the Gold subscription, they have an NSS, and they need to provide a solution quickly. Generally, their support is good. I would rate them an eight out of ten. 

Positive

We moved to Bizagi because the last solution was obsolete. We didn't have any support. So, we had to migrate a lot of processes to Bizagi. In another project, we were using Enterprise Risk Assessor (ERA), and we changed the process to Bizagi. We have a lot of processes in different solutions. We can migrate a few of them to Bizagi, but not all of them.

In my current organization, we also have a BPM tool from IBM. 

It is a cloud solution. It is easy because we don't manage the infrastructure. We just have to configure the environment. It was easy even in the on-premise version.

I handle the test deployments, but production is a different area. A user in the company does the deployment.

In the case of most processes that we automate or migrate to Bizagi, the return on investment has to be analyzed first. Before we automate a process, we have to specify that the return on investment is huge and that we can do it. With one of the processes, we saved a lot of paper. In one month, we could pay for the automation.

In the company where I am working currently, we use the free and the paid version. Bizagi Studio is free, and for production, there is a paid version.

When we were working with the on-premises solution, the licenses were a little bit expensive because we had to buy one by one a package of a hundred licenses, whereas now, we are working with the cloud solution, and it has a different cost. It's a different business model because we pay the license for the developers, but the cost is by the environment, and we have unlimited licenses. The business model is different now, but the benefit ratio is good.

In another company where I worked, they evaluated Bonitasoft and a few others.

I would recommend Bizagi because it's an excellent tool, but I would advise optimizing your processes before automating them. In my experience, a lot of companies automate the processes but don't optimize them before automating them. The advice is to follow the life cycle and optimize before automating because making changes after the automation would require a lot of work.

The initial deployment of processes was complex because we had a lot of integrations and huge processes. With most processes, the first deployment is complex. There are unexpected incidents. Sometimes, the data is not the same as the environment. We have to do a lot of settings with the integration certificates, and it takes a lot of time to make the environment work, but after that, the deployments are short and take about 30 minutes, but the first one is about five or six hours. We also have to test that the deployment is successful. The maintenance of processes/tools is an ongoing job. We are making a lot of improvements continually. We are maintaining the tools and updating them as per the necessity of the users.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for remediation in the context of bank remediation programs. We have workflows and different cases our analysts have to deal with. The cases go through various workflow stages, and each analyst can enter at different stages to work with the case throughout the process.

We don't have non-technical personnel, such as business users, using the solution's Live Processes feature to automate and launch simple processes. We have a developer who is in charge of that. From a user experience point of view, we have over 200 users leveraging the platform. 

The solution is deployed on-prem and mounted in a private Azure cloud. Inside the cloud are VMs, one used for a server and another as a jambox; everything is stored in the server. It's perfectly secure and isolated from the internet.

The solution helped our clients, as we can use Bizagi to execute processes for them and produce revenues from that. 

Bizagi reduced our time to market; we developed the solution in a few months, and then we were ready to execute processes.  

Bizagi helped free up employees to do more valuable work. We could do some of the same tasks with Excel spreadsheets, but it would take much longer. Bizagi affects the user experience by minimizing the time spent on databases and enabling more participation in an ongoing live process.

The ability to write our own code inside each activity is beneficial. Sometimes we need to create functionality that doesn't come out of the box, and this allows us to do that.

The orchestration capabilities provided by the solution are good; they're helpful and fully functional, plus Bizagi has a management consultant to assist. However, they could be better, and there is significant room for improvement.  

We can adapt processes we created with Bizagi as our business grows and more processes become automated. We have been doing that on a live process, and it works very well. If the change we are implementing is very different to a traditional workflow, we can create a new version and design cases in the new version instead of the older one. We can modify processes already in place if the change isn't too disruptive, or we can keep using the same platform but create cases in a new workflow instead of the old one, so there's a lot of flexibility. Adapting processes is straightforward, though it depends somewhat on the complexity of the process. Making minor modifications is not complicated; we go into the studio, change the piece of code, workflow, or data model we need, and then redeploy.   

The solution could be improved in the following ways:

• From a developer's point of view, an improvement in the layout would make the UI better.
• The way we interact with the data model could be improved. 
• Better definitions for Performers would be a welcome addition. 
• The ability to use proper code like C# or JS would be good because they currently have a hybrid type of code similar to JS.

We have been using Bizagi for three to four years. 

The solution's stability is good. As long as it's deployed the right way, it's relatively stable.

Bizagi is scalable, though it also depends on the quality of the infrastructure. Many records require a robust database, and Azure is a good choice.

The technical support could be better as it sometimes takes them too long to get back to us. We pay for a good support model too, and it's still not enough sometimes. It would be good if they were more responsive. 

Neutral

We didn't previously have the sort of scenarios we use Bizagi for, so no. 

I wasn't involved in the initial deployment; I came in later in the development process.

The solution requires periodic maintenance; we check that the database is healthy, and so on. This is carried out by about three staff members, a DVA, a QA, and a developer.

Bizagi provided us with an ROI. We operated for a bank with 200 staff working on 100,000 cases and resolved them within a year or two. They were paying us, of course, so we saw a return on our investment.

The pricing model is good; I believe it's free for up to 20 users, and then they start charging. I hear the solution can get quite expensive, however.

We evaluated UiPath, but it's more about creating robots for task automation, and in our case, we need people working on the tasks and interacting with the information. For example, if a bank charges someone for a service they never provided, an analyst would initially check the documentation, and then a supervisor would approve or not. UiPath is a different concept and doesn't fit our use cases.

I rate the product seven out of ten. 

The solution helps to integrate and automate multiple processes into a system, and we created a component that integrates two systems from Bizagi. It's a C# component that connects Bizagi with a different platform.

As far as connecting shareholders with processes, Bizagi is basically a database on the back end. We can also create a connector to integrate an external database or do the opposite and connect an external database to the Bizagi database and read the data from there.   

With what we have been developing, the solution performed as expected; there have been no surprises or unexpected benefits. 

I advise potential customers that Bizagi is the way to go for a small project, especially if it has less than 20 users, because it would be free. A cost-benefit analysis is required if you have more users than that. The data model is easily accessible, though the solution involves a degree of technical knowledge to leverage fully. Once that knowledge is up and running, you can keep growing your application as needed.

We're using it for cooperative business processes. For instance, if you work with IT and you want to request access to a specific database, you make the request using Bizagi and create a ticket. Similarly, for many other processes, when you want to request access to a system or to a physical area in the building, you use Bizagi.

It's a company requirement because I work for a large French and Brazilian insurance company. I work supporting over 2,700 active users and developing new processes.

Since 2018, we have registered approximately 168,000 tickets on Bizagi. There are actually more than that, as those are just the queries in one database, not all of them.

It has helped free up employees to do more valuable work. We hear that from our inside customers that we develop processes for. It helps save time for our employees.

I very much like the reusable rules and forms, and the way Bizagi controls the process flow. I also like the document generating system to generate PDFs and then .doc files with information gathered from a flow. At the end of a process, you can generate a document that can be printed.

I like the orchestration capabilities very much. They are what help control the process flow.

Bizagi also helps us to automate processes. We have over 50 automated processes right now. We are able to adapt the processes that we created with Bizagi. That's almost a daily job here. We are always improving processes and upgrading them and it's easy to do. It mostly depends on the business requirements. If a change doesn't require a REST integration, it's easy to adapt the process.

In general, I appreciate Bizagi’s integration capabilities, but there is one area that consistently creates challenges: the need to manually develop certain connectors. While it’s positive that the platform allows custom connector development, Bizagi should offer native support for widely used standards. For example, integrating with REST services that use client ID and secret should be built in, not dependent on developing a DLL in .NET via Visual Studio. Relying on WAL and external assemblies for something as common as REST communication adds unnecessary complexity and slows down delivery. Native REST support would strongly benefit both developers and business users.

There is also room for improvement in Bizagi’s reporting and visualization features. The platform doesn’t need to become a full BI solution, but offering more modern, flexible, and visually appealing charts would significantly enhance the user experience. Reports have some limitations, but the graphical options in particular are outdated and could benefit from a substantial upgrade.

Additionally, Bizagi should consider revisiting its commercial flexibility. This year alone, I’ve seen at least three large Brazilian customers move away from the platform due to pricing negotiations that didn’t progress. The perception is that Bizagi’s commercial team offers little room for tailored deals, even for strategic accounts. On top of that, customers feel increasingly pressured to migrate to Bizagi Cloud, which is considerably more expensive. For many organizations, the added cost doesn’t clearly justify the move, especially when the value proposition is not fully aligned with their operational needs.

Overall, Bizagi is a strong platform, but addressing these technical and commercial points would help retain customers, increase competitiveness, and deliver a more balanced value proposition.

I have been using Bizagi for modeling processes since 2007 and for business process automation since 2009.

The stability is pretty good. We don't have problems with Bizagi.

At the moment we are having a bit of a performance issue, but we are monitoring it to find out what is happening. It's taking a bit longer than we would like. That would be something that we would activate support for, but we don't have access to support right now.

Even though our company paid for support, it wasn't activated because of problems with the partner. We paid for the support license, but the partner didn't pay Bizagi. So we don't have support. But we should have it back in a week or so.

The performance issue is quite annoying. It's not fatal, just slow to approve and it takes five minutes to open the user options screen. It wasn't like this before.

We have contacted their tactical support a lot. Right now, I rate them at 4 out of 10. They were much better in the past. They could be better, but they're really good.

Neutral

The tool our company used to was being discontinued. We brought the processes into Bizagi and we automated them. We are going to stop paying for the other tool and always use Bizagi.

The one-click deployment feature in Bizagi is straightforward and efficient. The wizard manages the entire process, including versioning, which makes it the preferred option in most scenarios.

Our organization uses Bizagi enterprise-wide, with full Active Directory integration so users can authenticate with their standard corporate credentials.

In contrast, the advanced deployment process is considerably more complex and cumbersome. Developers must manually build deployment packages, manage configuration parameters, and handle all versioning activities themselves. While it offers greater flexibility, it demands significantly more effort and introduces additional points of control that must be managed by the development team.

From an operational standpoint, Bizagi requires minimal maintenance beyond standard infrastructure checks such as storage and server health. Overall, the platform is stable, but the disparity between the simplicity of the one-click deployment and the complexity of the advanced deployment remains a notable challenge.

No I did not.

We are using the paid version, not the free version.

I evaluated Intalio, Oracle BPM, and Aris BPA. None of them was able to automate the way I wanted.

I like Bizagi a lot as a low-code BPMS platform. I don't have experience with other automation platforms, but I find it really simple and intuitive for business automation. You have to do the process flow mapping drawing correctly; otherwise, you can't start the automation. That's really its strength. To map correctly, you need to know it will affect automation. Most people just use Bizagi for process mapping; they don't use it for automation.

My advice is to compare the cost of the on-premises and cloud options. With the cloud option, Bizagi manages a lot of infrastructure for you, so you don't have to worry about it. If you have a problem, like we're having with the performance issue, you just call them, and they take care of the rest.