We performed a comparison between Appian and Camunda Platform based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Appian has an edge over Camunda Platform in this comparison. It is easier to deploy and has better customer support.
"It's a stable 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."
"Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product."
"Recently, we added Appian Process Mining, Appian Portals, and now Appian RPA."
"It's heavy on business processing in terms of logic, process workflows, and primarily on the process design modeler. Appian is really great at that. In terms of the full stack set from a low-code platform perspective, it's definitely an eye opener since it can be deployed via mobile app and on the web as well."
"Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"Appian helps you do a lot of things. It's easy to configure and build an application platform, and it offers a lot of features that you find in an RPA solution. It's flexible so you can reuse it for a variety of use cases."
"There's this graphic that tells you how many lines or how many tickets are in each step. In that way, you know where you stand. I find this feature very valuable."
"Ease of use and ability to streamline a process model."
"Camunda Platform has a very good interface for workflow and business process design."
"The modeler is useful for creating the flow. The way to access the data through their REST API is also valuable. This is what we're using right now."
"We can share, discuss, and develop the model together — from a distance. It's really helped us during these times of isolation."
"Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure. It is more elaborate."
"The ease with which I can define workflows is most valuable. The latest updates and flexibility that it provides around a task activity are interesting for me."
"It is open-source. It supports microservice orchestration. This is what we are really interested in. We can customize our products depending on the use cases."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"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."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"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."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site."
"I'm from the .NET world and I would like to use it, rather than Java."
"While it's very scalable, it would be great if auto-scaling capabilities were added to it... one area that really could help out would be to have dynamic resizing of the cluster. Right now, you have to do capacity planning."
"When trying to design rule tables the solutions graphical user interface could improve, it could be more user friendly."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"The initial set up could be simplified, it's complex."
"Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved."
"It has a Postgres database at the backend, and it is very difficult to scale if you increase the number of processes running. We did hit some barriers. We were able to overcome them, but it was a problem. Camunda has another product called Camunda Cloud, which supposedly doesn't have the same scalability problems, but we are not using Camunda Cloud because the set of features is smaller than Camunda On-Premises. So, its scalability can be improved. Because it has a single database, it is more difficult to scale if you have a huge success."
"They have a migration plugin that can be used to migrate from one BPM to another BPM. It is in the beta stage since last year. If they can make it available in the market, it would be great. We are going to have a couple of migration projects for migrating from IBM BPM to Camunda, and this plugin would be useful. I have already discussed this with them two weeks ago and asked them to look into this and add it as a feature. We are expecting this plugin to be available in the next version. This is the only requirement we have at present. They keep on coming up with different features, which is helping us a lot. Its latest release that came out last month was awesome."
Camunda is the leader in process orchestration software. Our software helps orchestrate complex business processes that span people, systems, and devices. With Camunda, business users collaborate with developers to model and automate end-to-end processes using BPMN-powered flowcharts that run with the speed, scale, and resiliency required to compete in today’s digital-first world. Hundreds of enterprises such as Allianz, ING, and Vodafone design, automate, and improve mission-critical business processes with Camunda to drive digital transformation. To learn more visit camunda.com.
Appian is ranked 3rd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 26 reviews while Camunda Platform is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 32 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Camunda Platform is rated 8.2. 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 Camunda Platform writes "Highly valuable for orchestrating complex business processes, solving many problems, and making the business side understand what we are talking about". Appian is most compared with ServiceNow, Microsoft Power Apps, Pega BPM, Salesforce Platform and Mendix, whereas Camunda Platform is most compared with Apache Airflow, Pega BPM, Bizagi, Bonita and SAP Signavio Process Manager. See our Appian vs. Camunda Platform report.
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.