No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ARIS Process Governance vs Appian comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Appian
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (9th), Rapid Application Development Software (13th), Low-Code Development Platforms (7th), Process Mining (6th), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (10th)
ARIS Process Governance
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
27th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Appian is 3.2%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ARIS Process Governance is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Appian3.2%
ARIS Process Governance0.7%
Other96.1%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Shad Bhowmik - PeerSpot reviewer
Finance Specialist at a government with 5,001-10,000 employees
Automated remittance workflows have boosted speed and accuracy but still need geo-tagging improvements
Remittance is a crucial part of my integral operation, so any disruption would majorly impact our clients. After switching to Appian, we never faced any disruption as it is reliable and we can generate data at any point in time, quite faster than other tools in my personal opinion. Regulators can ask for data from us at any time, and with Appian, we download data from our Appian tools to share it with them whenever they ask. I would share a real-life example: a customer's transaction processed more than a year ago. Suddenly the customer came back asking for all the details. In our previous tool, it was quite difficult to generate transaction details from over a year ago; however, while using Appian, we can pull up data using different key search fields, such as a customer's cell phone number, remittance tracking number, or MT103 reference number. We shared it with the customer instantly, and the customer was surprised we could provide all the details in such a short time. It added reputational value for our organization, thanks to Appian.You have pointed out two major things: time-saving and reduction of error, which are key points while processing remittance. Previously, while using another tool, it was quite time-consuming to process remittance, but after switching to Appian, it can extract data from MT103, eliminating the need for manual data entry. The process has become fully automated. Previously we could process only five to ten transactions within an hour, but now, after switching to Appian, we can process about 100 transactions in an hour, making it 10 times faster. In terms of error detection, since Appian extracts data from MT103, the extraction rate is quite good, and the error rate is negligible, lower than 0.001%. We can share accurate, error-free data with the regulator, which is essential for us. Appian benefits us significantly. After receiving an MT103, we check what the remitter is, the amount, if it is under threshold for processing, and if it is from a high-priority remitter or client. Since Appian extracts data from MT103 messages and identifies top-level clients from the database, it can notify us to process their transactions with priority. Due to automated data extraction, there are fewer instances of error. In our previous tool, we reported regulatory data to the central bank manually and often received complaints about invalid purpose codes due to manual data entry. Appian handles this automatically, and after switching, our error rate has dropped significantly, resulting in positive feedback from the Central Bank of Bangladesh regarding our reduced error rates. This has greatly enhanced our organization's reputation. Appian is fully on-premises, and we have our own system.
Dirk Struyf - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Advisor Staff at VLM
Easy to use, reliable, and simple to expand
We have used the same version for two years, however, now there's a new version, which solves a lot of problems. The solution we use that's from two years ago, has the ARIS Connect Server, the web application, and the ARIS client application. Some things you have to do in the clients, and you can't do them in the web environment. In the new version, though it's not installed by us, it's changed. You can do this. You can do almost everything in the web client. The difficulty that you have with switching between the two environments is solved in the new version. However, I haven't tested it yet. That said, that was one of the issues we had. It's a bit annoying that you have to use two environments in the older version.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Appian had definitely improved the productivity, and functionality of our company."
"Being able to model requirements in BPMN 2.0, get agreement from business and IT, and then have Appian BPMN 2.0 compliant engine execute the diagram has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"The valuable features include process automation, Appian Portal, and Appian RPA."
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution is also quite fast."
"There is no need to worry about vulnerabilities in the system, because Appian built a secure system​."
"Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"Development time is much faster than traditional coding solutions, and it is more robust."
"With Appian's low code rapid development model, the ROI can be huge, while the break-even point should be accelerated tremendously."
"It's a very easy-to-use product."
"This product is useful when you're modeling business processes; you can use all the features that your catalog has inside the modeling and export it to a BPM augmentation engine."
"The solution is very stable, there are no bugs or glitches, it doesn't crash or freeze, it's reliable, and the performance is good."
"Using this solution we can design our own processor governance, assign some specific technical services, and also run tests of the process to make sure it operates as we need it to."
"They offer a variety of documentation, user manuals, and community forums for users to seek assistance and share experiences."
 

Cons

"I would like to see more complete university tools. For example, with UiPath, I have had a good experience related to a free course in order to provide some users some different levels of knowledge. This extra training helps users not only use the solution but to develop further within the tool."
"If there is a very complex process that includes a lot of data transitioning and memory-centric processes, it consumes a lot of memory."
"The solution could improve robotic process automation."
"Newer features, especially in terms of scalability, have to become more scalable than what it is today, and it needs better integration with our existing application ecosystem."
"Initially, it works fine, but going forward, you are hitting performance issues whenever you create the views to get the data from the database."
"Appian is a great tool for internal use cases where the users are company employees, but it has room to improve for use cases where the users are public facing, where anonymous users could come to a site and run a business workflow or interact with some data."
"We would like to have more granular control for interface styling."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"I recognize the product has areas for potential improvement similar to every tool."
"The solution uses a coding language for process design that is specific only to this product. We would like to see this changed to something more universal."
"There is a lot of complexity around licensing and that should be improved."
"It's a bit annoying that you have to use two environments in the older version."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license is not very cheap. It's on the expensive side."
"The pricing can be a little confusing to customers."
"The solution offers a monthly subscription model. That's what we use. I recall it being about $90 a month. They do have different tiers."
"We will have to have a dialogue or negotiate a price for future use. To start with, it is a reasonable price. As we go ahead, we will have to make sure the costs are inline with our expectations as we grow our user base and workloads."
"Product pricing compared to some of the earlier vendors, like IBM, CA, and Oracle, is quite well-priced. Although, we do feel that as we increase the number of users and the workload increases, we will have to spend more."
"The price of this solution is a little high here in Mongolia."
"When it comes to pricing, it's definitely not affordable. However, it really depends on the requirements that you're seeking from the solution."
"The tool is quite costly."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which do you prefer - Appian or Camunda Platform?
Appian is fast when building simple to medium solutions. This solution offers simple drag-and-drop functionality with easy plug-and-play options. The initial setup was seamless and very easy to imp...
Is Appian a suitable solution for beginners who have no additional preparation?
Appian is actually pretty big on educating its users, including with courses that reward you with certifications. There is a whole section on their company’s website where you can check out the edu...
Is it easy to set up Appian or did you have to resort to professional help?
We had some issues when we were setting up Appian. It was quite surprising, since this is a low-code tool which, in its essence, means it is meant for business users and inexperienced beginners. So...
What needs improvement with ARIS Process Governance?
I recognize the product has areas for potential improvement similar to every tool.
What advice do you have for others considering ARIS Process Governance?
I would recommend ARIS Process Governance to any company looking to implement enterprise architecture, BPM, or Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC), as I thoroughly understand its functionalities...
 

Also Known As

Appian BPM, Appian AnyWhere, Appian Enterprise BPMS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hansard Global plc, Punch Taverns, Pirelli, Crawford & Company, EDP Renewables, Queensland Government Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (, Bank of Tennessee
ARIS serves customers across all industries and of every size worldwide. Companies trust ARIS as the market leader for process excellence with more than 30 years of experience in the market and 10 million users worldwide, from 1 user companies to the Fortune 500.
Find out what your peers are saying about ARIS Process Governance vs. Appian and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.