We performed a comparison between Appian and AuraQuantic 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 most valuable feature is business automation."
"Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"Appian is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster."
"It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"The solution has a lot of strong features for the financial industry, it is very easy to use."
"The solution's most valuable features are the regular periodic and quarterly updates, they are very useful updates. They keep improving the solution more often, and that helps the platform or code always be up to date with the latest features."
"Appian has many valuable features, the first being the ease of development—rapid development. Second, the process of learning the product and tool is faster when compared to its peers in the market. It's closer to low-code, and while it's still not very easy, it's more low-code than other products in the industry. Appian has a good user interface, a seamless model user interface, which comes without additional coding. It can also integrate with multiple systems."
"AuraPortal has the best price for its process."
"AuraPortal is very user-friendly and flexible."
"AuraQuantic's most valuable features are the zero code, user-friendly mode, and integration."
"Appian could be improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with free-built process packs."
"Lacks integration with other products."
"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."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"While Appian is generally flexible, it's rigid in some ways. It takes longer to do something that isn't available out of the box."
"The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"The UI of Appian is more internal. Recently, there has been an addition of an external user portal for the customer-facing stuff. It's still coming out."
"AuraQuantic's price could be improved."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"More documentation and the ability to extract different reports about different relations in the objects I use will help."
Appian is ranked 3rd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 26 reviews while AuraQuantic is ranked 31st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while AuraQuantic is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Stands out with its integration capabilities, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AuraQuantic writes "Helps organizations improve their work processes". Appian is most compared with Camunda Platform, ServiceNow, Microsoft Power Apps, Pega BPM and Salesforce Platform, whereas AuraQuantic is most compared with IBM BPM, Pega BPM, Camunda Platform, Bizagi and Bonita. See our Appian vs. AuraQuantic 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.
