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

Appian vs ProcessMaker comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

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

Automation Anywhere
Sponsored
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
2nd
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
666
Ranking in other categories
Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (2nd), Process Mining (1st), Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (1st), Agentic Automation (1st), AI Legal & Compliance (1st), AI Finance & Accounting (2nd), AI Procurement & Supply Chain (1st)
Appian
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
6th
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (6th), Rapid Application Development Software (14th), Low-Code Development Platforms (10th), Process Mining (6th)
ProcessMaker
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
38th
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
30th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Automation Anywhere is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Appian is 3.4%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ProcessMaker is 0.9%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Automation Anywhere1.0%
Appian3.4%
ProcessMaker0.9%
Other94.7%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Venkat Sivaprakash - PeerSpot reviewer
Management Consultant at Accenture
Has significantly improved document-driven workflows and reduced processing time across finance and HR functions
Automation Anywhere has evolved significantly and upgraded itself to provide agentic AI and AI-based automation solutions for document automation. The product has matured considerably over time. We can create workflows that can call an API. We can include prompts in particular workflows for ChatGPT-related functions, connecting to an LLM and RAG to perform tasks. For document automation, modern features are available to train documents, ensuring high accuracy and repeatability over time. The system is very easy to use. I recently completed a course in document automation, typically designed for people involved in coding and technical aspects. Though I understand coding comprehensively, I don't do actual coding. The course was very accessible. Currently, extensive coding isn't necessary due to the hybrid model incorporating GenAI aspects, low-code, no-code capabilities, APIs, and numerous pre-built objects in Automation Anywhere. The features include GenAI-driven prompting methods and workflow creation capabilities. In these workflows, we can create decision boxes and call APIs without coding. We simply pull objects, drop them, connect them, and add minimal coding when needed. The most crucial aspect isn't coding but rather sizing the automation and fleshing out the details. Automation Co-pilot takes notes and performs automated analysis. It can extract details from videos, summarize conversations, and provide detailed information. During calls, it identifies instructions and performs tasks such as preparing reports and reconciliation. Automation Anywhere can also connect with Microsoft Co-pilot. Through Co-pilot, real-time operations can be executed, allowing direct interaction between vendors and automation through this component.
SB
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.
UchechiSylvanus - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead, Process Improvement & RPA at Fidelity Bank Plc
Works well, but its interface should be a bit more user-friendly
We use it for our process flows and levels of approvals, but I am not managing it directly Its performance, stability, and security are fine. Its interface should be a bit more user-friendly. I have been using this solution for close to a year. It is stable. It is easy to scale. We currently…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like all of the features, especially the MetaBot, REST API, and SAP DLL."
"The drag-and-drop feature is valuable."
"Automation Anywhere can have a significant impact on any company's operation, as it can automate a wide variety of tasks that are mundane, time-consuming, and the least productive."
"For the tasks that I do repeatedly, I can record processes using Automation Anywhere. I record mouse and keyboard actions and create a workflow for those activities. This minimizes my workload. The recording option is very useful."
"Based on my experience, I have found Automation Anywhere to be more stable and accessible."
"My experience with the deployment of the solution is positive; it's fast, and we have not encountered any problems related to that."
"I found the new feature of integrating Python and HTML the most valuable."
"Co-pilot certainly makes the job easier if the client has a subscription. It allows me to analyze desktop flows and activities and create flows using natural language."
"Rapid development with low-code makes it easier to quickly get apps implemented and the time to break-even and ROI is much faster."
"Appian had definitely improved the productivity, and functionality of our company."
"Appian has greatly improved how quickly we are able to build and deploy technology solutions for our business partners."
"The tool is very flexible."
"It's a stable product."
"Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product."
"It is easy for me to define the process and create configurable workflows."
"The valuable features include process automation, Appian Portal, and Appian RPA."
"What I like most is the seamlessness of the workflow capabilities."
"Its performance, stability, and security are fine."
 

Cons

"I have not seen bots working efficiently in the area of reporting."
"Their support also needs improvement."
"There can be some options to connect to the database directly where we should be able to add some data."
"Unwanted windows are popping up. We have to train a bot to recognize the window if it comes up, know what it is, and click it. If it is interrupting our bot, I just want to avoid that window, because I am getting failed logs."
"Automation Anywhere can be improved by integrating self-correction capabilities into the bots, particularly as we develop RPA, where changes in environment paths require additional redeveloping efforts."
"Currently, while working on the SAP part, I encounter some challenges, particularly not being able to extract the tree structure."
"Their license model needs to be improved. The biggest issue for me is that the license is tied to a person, and it is not something that I can pass if I want to use it for the first five hours and pass it on to you for the next five hours and so on. When we automate, the license is tied to me, and if you or somebody else needs to use that license, as a COE administrator, I need to transfer the license from person A to person B. This is something that I have always told them that should not be this way because you want to utilize your licenses effectively."
"Maybe not improved but I heard that the 2019 version is going to look more like UiPath, which is not ideal for a typical/classic developer."
"I think Appian could improve by adding its own native GenAI and agentic capabilities."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The UI of the application has been completely overhauled within the past couple years, but the tools for developing the new interface have not yet been updated."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"We have clients that want to use Office 365, Microsoft Analytics, and Power Apps. Appian just isn't the same as using something specifically designed to cater to the Microsoft Suite."
"From a reseller's point of view, subscription licensing could be improved to be more cost-effective, especially for new prospects and smaller investments."
"This solution only supports basic text, but we would like to be able to insert components such as rich text, graphs, charts, pictures, and other objects."
"Its interface should be a bit more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have saved customers 400% in terms of time saved by implementing this product."
"The pricing is a bit higher."
"We have seen ROI on one of the process, but not on the other processes yet."
"I believe it is $10,000 for Bot Creator."
"The price is very reasonable."
"We purchase on a bot basis. Our costs are approximately $5,000."
"Including the AWS setup and everything per license, it costs us around $10,000 on an annual basis. I believe that is pretty reasonable considering the teams that we have."
"The Automation Anywhere license is affordable and not complex."
"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."
"BPM done right is a huge value proposition for almost any company, and with Appian's low code rapid development model, the ROI can be huge, while the break-even point should be accelerated tremendously."
"The price is high."
"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."
"The cost is calculated on a per-user basis. It might be expensive for small and mid-sized enterprises."
"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."
"It's good value for the price."
"I'm sure it is cost-effective, but right now, we're just toying around with it. So, I don't have any hard numbers."
"We have a yearly license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
915,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business161
Midsize Enterprise85
Large Enterprise561
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
It depends on your use case. Is it simply to automate a couple of processes? Is it to augment a human team? AA is ver...
How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
From my experience using AA tool, it depends on the applications that you want to automate, because there some applic...
How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
It is a highly preferred RPA tool. You can check my Automation Anywhere Review to know more.
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...
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. The...
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 i...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Automation Anywhere, Testing Anywhere, Automation Anywhere Enterprise, Agentic Process Automation System (Now Certified for WorkSpaces)
Appian BPM, Appian AnyWhere, Appian Enterprise BPMS
ProcessMaker Workflow Management & BPM, ProcessMaker BPM
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Linkedin, Cisco, Juniper Networks, DellEMC, Comcast, Mastercard, Quest Diagnostics
Hansard Global plc, Punch Taverns, Pirelli, Crawford & Company, EDP Renewables, Queensland Government Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (, Bank of Tennessee
Tulsa Community College, Sirius College, Mcredit Vietnam, Oregon City Schools, Lakozy Toyota, HyperCube
Find out what your peers are saying about Appian vs. ProcessMaker and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.