ABBYY Vantage Reviews

Our primary use case of this solution is for document processing. Whenever I receive an email from a vendor or business it gets processed to the ABBYY server. I've created a layout in FlexiCapture that recognizes the template, extracts the field and puts it into the Excel format. I mainly work with purchase and invoice documents and ABBYY checks the validation conditions of an invoice. I'm the manager RPA developer and we are customers of ABBYY FlexiCapture.

The advantage of the solution is being able to identify and extract the element you need from a document. The template can be customized for this. We can create our own rules to validate some values before exporting the results. 

I would like to see consistency improved. If the same document is uploaded twice, I might get a different outcome the second time. Machine learning needs to be improved. We have some issues with scanned documents that may have a quality less than 300 dpi and the quality isn't high enough for ABBYY to accurately read it, and it therefore requires manual intervention. There is scope for improvement which could include AI modelling and training. If AI is there then it will identify it in a better way. There is a field training option that already has an ML algorithm for it, but it's not much use. Hand-written documents have less than 50% accuracy. 

I've been using this solution for a year and a half. 

We haven't had any issues with stability, I think it's better than other solutions. 

I don't know about scalability because I'm the only user in the company. We deployed in the AWS server and we have a team who control everything. We currently have eight projects related to OCR which are in the pipeline. I have already trained two other guys.

There is a forum for support but not many people are active. We have a license with them so we will usually receive a response within 48 hours. 

The initial setup was okay, the difficulties came later with the poor quality of documents we received. 

We pay an annual license fee, our management team that deals with that. 

I did a POC on all the different OCR tools in terms of the level of accuracy I get from each document. ABBYY and Amazon Textract did quite well, whereas Kofax did not provide as good a result. Textract reads the entire document data and provides raw data output in the string format. With ABBYY, I can add a field into the template and then extract it but in Textract adding a customized field is not possible.

Anyone using this needs to know they won't get 100% accuracy. Human intervention is required depending on the quality of the document. Clearly, if the quality is good, the results will be better. ABBYY has been on the market for over 20 years so they're well supported including all other RPA tools. Competitively, I think ABBYY is better than other OCR tools. 

It's good to test the solution with multiple samples. Once you create a layout, test it with multiple documents and see what you're able to achieve. If I see that 30 out of 100 documents are not processed 100%, I'll retrain it to improve the accuracy level for when the same document comes in next time.

I rate this solution a six out of 10. 

We are a logistics company, and, due to the fact that a lot of documents get generated on a daily basis, documents need to be processed and data extracted. That's our primary use case for this solution. We use it for a lot of data extraction.

The fact that IBM Datacap uses ABBYY's core engine for OCR, is quite useful for us. It makes them one of the key players as far as OCR extraction is concerned. 

The fact that they've packaged it very well in the sense that you have these field extraction batches which enable you to auto claim the documents, and you have these templates which are structurally laid out, which enables you to mark a specific zone from which data can be extracted. 

It saves us a lot of manual work.

The automation on offer is good.

Technical support, for the most part, is helpful.

A lot of things could be improved, especially if you look at the number of support tickets that we have created. Looking at those would indicate the things that can be improved. 

For example, more often than not, we are forced to rely on template creation in order to bring the accuracy of extraction to 100%. 

Even though the training works, it's not as good as it is made out to be. In our case, we've got thousands of suppliers and it is just not humanly possible for us to keep creating templates for each one of these suppliers. What we would need is an out-of-the-box extraction to be even more accurate, or for the training to improve in such a way that just the training should be able to give us a reasonable amount of accuracy. I know that 100% is too high a limit to aim at, however, even if we get close to 85% to 90% margin, it would be much better. Something that could do that out of the box would solve most of the problems.

ABBYY introduced a reporting data warehouse last December, however, that reporting data warehouse has its own fair share of problems. Something like accuracy and completeness of out-of-the-box recognition is something that should be available as part of your default reports in the tool itself. Right now, that is missing. 

ABBYY provides a document definition for an invoice, however, that invoice is a supplier invoice. In our organization, we deal with commercial invoices most of the time. The problem there is that supplier invoices. If you put them into the system, it gives you around 80% to 85% accuracy out of the box. However, with commercial invoices, you only get around 60% accuracy out of the box.

Based on the input that we have provided, ABBYY is now working on including the commercial invoices as well as part of that default invoice document definition. They are working on that as well. There are a lot of minor things that have come up. For example, when you create a template, ABBYY claims that you can export the default template that is generated as part of the training, and then make changes to that and then import it back. What we found was that the concept applies only to certain things. The training of the line items cannot be exported as a template. They said it's to do with the way machine learning was being applied and all that. However, these are all things which kind of increase the development time.

I have a couple of years' experience with this solution. I've been working with it since about 2019.

The performance can improve. Even though we have tried out the solution's provider, ABBYY, in terms of having more processing stations, all still boils down to the fact of how your application is configured. For example, in our case, we have about five processing stations in production. When we started off, it took almost 60 seconds to process one page because of the complex nature of our application. We had around five document types, and each type has to be classified based on a set of keywords, and then you had to apply the document definitions on top of them. Then it goes through this concept of the generic layout and the additional layout and so forth. Almost every page used to take about 60 seconds on average. Then we made a lot of tweaks to the application and then we brought it down to around 22 seconds per page.

That said, even then, when you're talking about the space that we are in, the domain that we are working in, sometimes a 100-page document has to be processed within around 30 minutes. If you take a 100-page document, only for processing that itself, it takes almost close to an hour. Then, what happens is that additional stages like verification, et cetera, by the time the data is exported and uploaded into the target system, it's taken too long.

With the normal ABBYY support, you go to support.abby.com and you raise tickets. The support is almost immediate. There are constant responses that come to you. However, what I've also seen is that there are a lot of complex problems for which we have not gotten the solution we need. While the response has been great, if you asked me whether all the queries for the problems that we raised have been solved, the answer is no. On the other hand, we also have a chance to interact with the ABBYY professional services team directly due to the contract that has been established with our organization. They are a wonderful bunch of people and there's this personal rapport that we have with them. We get in touch with them on a weekly basis and our query is resolved.

In our organization, it is the IT team that takes care of the installation. I do not have much information about the process and I wasn't really a part of it. 

We're just a customer and an end-user.

I'd advise users that, when you start off with your first project on FlexiCapture, choose a project which has at least something which can accommodate a very high pattern. For example, if you're going to go for a use case wherein documents have to be processed within the next 30 minutes, you're going to face a lot of problems. ABBYY is a wonderful tool, however, it has got its own set of constraints. It's very important to understand the constraints of the tool.

The strength of the ABBYY FlexiCapture license is the OCR engine. However, if you're extracting it to process millions of documents within a very small amount of time, that is not going to happen. 

It's very, very important for the final operators who are going to use the tool to understand what OCR is all about. The problems that we face are not technical at all. It is about trying to convince people, people who have been doing operations manually to change their processes. If you have a situation where people are looking at documents, looking at the data, and entering it into a system, and then come and tell them that the solution will extract that information automatically and they just have to verify that information, they'll need to change their approach. 

It's very important to get the business team who will be doing the verification into a meeting, in order to help them understand what OCR is, and also its limitations. 

You will need to specify the stock field and the zones. OCR is able to learn on its own and understand how to extract data from it. However, there are certain things that you will have to teach people. You have to tell them the fact that a page is converted into black and white, and that the gray areas either cannot be black or white as certain characters that are being recognized may turn out to be something else. OCR tells you the level of confidence based on what gets extracted. All this has to be translated to the business team so that they understand the tool and its limitations. If you do this, you can ensure the success of the project.

Therefore, while ABBYY, as a tool, is great, there is a lot of work that needs to be done before you start implementing it.

I'd rate the solution overall at a nine out of ten. We have had to initiate a lot of fixes, however, overall, it's quite good.

We are using this solution for PDF reading capabilities for some invoices. We also utilize it to read DW4 forms.

There are many others to compare with such as Google and Microsoft, but we haven't seen any specific distinction that stood out with Abbyy.

They were the most used, which is the reason we chose them.

Abbyy is really good in terms of reading OCR.

There has always been a challenge with Word and PDF reading capabilities. This is an area that needs improvement.

There are certain controls like radio buttons and checkboxes that when reading PDFs, really doesn't go well with the RPA.

We work with Abbyy and UiPath. Abbyy provides its API to be utilized with UiPath, and that is how we use it.

We have been working with Abbyy for at least one year. We have one or two projects that we have worked on with Abbyy.

Abbyy is a stable solution.

It's not really scalable. When it comes to PDF reading, we are very specific to that particular document and that template with some of the verbiage.

I have not seen it to be more scalable with any OCR capabilities.

I have not contacted technical support.

Previously, we didn't try any other solutions. We have to have that screen gripping capabilities and OCR. UiPath with Abbyy was the right choice.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We did not go with the licensed version of this solution.

It's more trial and error, but Abbyy is still really good in terms of OCR. If you have a consistent use case, then I think that Abbyy is the right fit.

I would rate Abbyy Vantage an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for our invoice project. We wanted to capture the sales and use tax data from our invoices. I'm a senior manager and we are currently customers of ABBYY, hoping to become resellers in the future. 

I think the machine learning capability of ABBYY is pretty good. You can create your small frame model and then the software works well, applying that training to extract the data out of other invoices.

I think that the tool is really complex. It works well, but in terms of rolling it out to a large audience that is not very tech savvy, this tool might be a little too much for them to handle. I think there needs to be some sort of simplification for that kind of user. ABBYY has the FlexiLayout Studio tool which is used for creating layouts for semi-structured and unstructured documents. It's pretty complex and we'd like to see some simplification there.

I've been using this solution for four months. 

I think that once it is installed, the solution is stable. There are no issues that come up. 

When it comes to scalability, you might need to install multiple instances of these stations. It comes in two pieces, one is a server and one is the stations. The stations can be scaled up, and can connect to the centralized server and work well, but I think that if you wanted to have it scaled for a large number of users you might have to think about creating some wrappers around it.

We have a user base of around 50 to 100 people but we are gradually rolling it out, so I think right now we only have 20 users who are actively using it, but down the road we expect that to come close to 100.

In general, the ABBYY support is pretty good. They are very responsive and try to resolve any issues.

I think installation is pretty straightforward, except that if you are using a distributed version, then there are some prerequisites in terms of IAS that need to be installed beforehand. That makes it a little challenging, but I think if you have the right support from ABBYY you can manage that easily.

The ABBYY license is calculated by pages and it all depends on how you negotiate the licensing with them. If you have a pretty large use case, you might get some discounts, but if you have a pretty small use case, they might be firm on the price.

We did our due diligence on a number of solutions and we found ABBYY to be more widely known and they've received pretty good reviews. That's why we chose them along with the fact that their licensing is decent enough. The other solutions we looked at were not as good as ABBYY and were more expensive. 

I think each company needs to make a judgment as to whether you can handle a technically challenging solution, because ABBYY is challenging. If you need to have your people trained ahead of time to get some support built into your organization, you should do that. If your organization is not very tech savvy, this solution might not work for you very well.

We still need to carry out more evaluations. For example, the out of the box, SDK support. I'd like to know how much free SDK support we would get if we try to build a wrapper around ABBYY. I think those are the things that we need to evaluate on our end, but overall I think we are pretty happy with this tool.

I think this is a good solution and would rate it an eight out of 10.

We need to understand ABBYY Vantage to add some projects and push them to our customers.

I have worked on many different OCR extraction tools, like document understanding, which uses ML technology. Compared to other tools, ABBYY Vantage is better because it's very user-friendly. It has a wide variety where we can manipulate or code the document as per our specifications, like OCR or many more specifications.

Since we are using a trial version, we don't have administration access to create a tenant to integrate my OCR series with Postman. Right now, we are doing one POC, and to complete that POC, we need that access because it's a requirement.

I have been using ABBYY Vantage for a couple of months.

In my team, three to four people are using ABBYY Vantage.

Our experience with our FlexiCapture was good. In FlexiCapture, you have to create templates because it does not use ML or AI technology. We learned that ABBYY Vantage uses ML technology, and we want to explore it.

ABBYY Vantage's initial setup is very beautiful. We didn't face any hurdles during the setup.

The solution is deployed on ABBYY cloud in our organization.

Overall, I rate ABBYY Vantage an eight out of ten.

My client uses ABBYY Vantage for a banking and insurance account and usually processes invoices and banking documents in paper format.

The advantage for ABBYY Vantage is in the visual tools to parameterize and set documents. Those are the stronger features.

It's important to incorporate image detection for signatures or other handwriting elements in the document.

I have been using ABBYY Vantage for the last year.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

For standard documents without complex rules to apply, scaling is easy. But when we need to apply complex rules, we need the skills to do so.

My client is a high enterprise.

I rate the scalability a seven out of ten.

Initial setup is easy. There are existing templates for several kinds of documents.

For most documents, it takes a few weeks or so to deploy. Deployment time depends on the rules one must apply to the documental process rather than the document complexity.

I rate the pricing a five out of ten.

I recommend ABBYY Vantage and rate it ten out of ten.

We are using ABBYY FlexiCapture for invoices.

The most valuable feature of ABBYY FlexiCapture is the accuracy of the general extractions.

ABBYY FlexiCapture could improve in the maintenance, and there are some issues. You have to make efforts to do corrections. Additionally, it could be more user-friendly in terms of connecting between different solutions.

I have been using ABBYY FlexiCapture for approximately one year.

ABBYY FlexiCapture is highly stable. The processing time is very fast.

We have two people using ABBYY FlexiCapture in my company.

I have tested Vantage, and it is more user-friendly than the ABBYY FlexiCapture.

The initial setup of ABBYY FlexiCapture was not easy, mainly because you have to configure a lot of things. It depends on the installation itself if it's going to be on the server or on the same system, but either way, it is not simple. 

I rate ABBYY FlexiCapture a nine out of ten.

I work with document automation where we have to create settings to understand if all the documents are there to be processed or if there is something missing. I gather the data from these documents, making them available for any automation like UiPath.

I like that it has the capability of processing a high volume of documents with great accuracy, and also the possibility of creating layers with APIs and robotic process automation. We can use these layers to connect and create an automation for the data that are available from the paper source or document source.

They have a product called Mobile Web Capture that connects with ABBYY FlexiCapture and it is a separate feature. I think they should embed Mobile Web Capture as a standard feature.

I have been using ABBYY Flexi Capture for the past ten years.

ABBYY FlexiCapture is stable.

There is no other IDP solution able to scale as ABBYY FlexiCapture. They don't only have the OCR and the ability to contextualize it, but the ability to scale and process million of pages, I have not seen anything like it in the market.

When you reach technical support for some idea of writitng simple scripts, they want you to speak to professional services. There are two parts to technical support. One is the professional service team where you are charged every time you try to reach them. And the other is the support. The support should be able to give the most basic information to the customers like simple scripts. They are not allowed to provide simple funciotnalities scripts. You have to contact the professional sales team. Many of these small problems can be solved quickly by technical support. 

Professional Services know everything you need about the tool.

Positive

Setup is easy. There are some specific jobs that need some scripts to call the functionalities of this solution. You do not have a map to follow how-to read some specific functionalities. But most of our processes, ninety-five percent of them, we were able to process and create from the tool itself, the user interface, and by adding some simple scripts.

You can trust ABBYY FlexiCapture. It is a smart solution and has many functionalities. I can recommend instead other low-cost and no-cost solutions. 

You can not compare ABBYY FlexiCapture with anything else on the market. On a scale of one to ten, I rate ABBYY FlexiCapture a ten.

The advantage of this tool is that it is a proven product. A lot of other products are quite new in the market.

Initially, it was good, but now, in terms of ease of implementation and accuracy, there are better competitors in the market. What we are seeing in some of the other tools isn't there in ABBYY. They have to improve it to include such features. Otherwise, it will be difficult for them to compete in the market.

There is more ease of implementation in new products. The time taken to extract the information is less in new products. We should be able to have a very light implementation. I have seen other products where you don't have to install anything, and everything works on the cloud as a service.

Similarly, there are difficulties with some of the documents, but there are some for which it works out. ABBYY should be definitely looking into that.

It has been more than three years.

Based on the implementation experience we have, it is scalable, and there is no doubt about it.

I don't have much experience with them. I only contacted their support team for something related to their training.

There is no doubt that it is a good tool, but you need to think about what is your goal and what you want to use it for in the long term. When we started, this was the only intelligent document-processing company available, but now, there are a number of players in the market. We came to know very recently that they have a higher success rate than this one. So, you have to evaluate according to your needs. 

I would rate it a six out of ten.

We are an implementor and we create solutions for our clients. One of the products that we use is ABBYY FlexiCapture.

We are currently implementing a use case for capturing bank statements. Using ABBYY FlexiCapture, we are working to capture the check statements with different fonts that include the value, payee name, and date of birth.

This product makes intelligent automatic documentation predictions, and for our use case and what we are targeting, the accuracy is 90%.

The most valuable feature is the accuracy of document extraction. If you compare it to other applications, such as IQ Bot, or products on AWS, FlexiCapture is much better.

The accuracy changes depending on the scenario so you need to test it before committing to this solution.

The is a stable product.

FlexiCapture is scalable. 

I would rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

I also use IQ Bot and UiPath. ABBYY is easier to use than these other products.

The initial setup is not difficult. The vendor provides technical documents to assist with deployment. It normally takes a few days to deploy but if there are a lot of configurations, for example with all of the network-related stuff, it takes more time.

For the deployment, between three and five people are enough. The maintenance can be handled by two people.

My advice for anybody who is considering this product is to start with a PoC. They need to see whether it's feasible and can handle the documents that they want to capture. Before entering into an agreement to purchase the product, try different samples and different scenarios because the accuracy is different.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.