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
6.9
Number of Reviews
662
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)
7th
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 (8th), Rapid Application Development Software (14th), Low-Code Development Platforms (9th), Process Mining (6th)
ProcessMaker
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
40th
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 September 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Automation Anywhere is 0.9%, up from 0.2% 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 Anywhere0.9%
Appian3.4%
ProcessMaker0.9%
Other94.8%
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

"The product is easy to use. It is a good tool for developers and business users."
"We have benefitted a lot now, but expect that we will benefit even more in the future as we get better at using intelligence."
"It's a perfect product; it's made my life very easy and a lot of people's lives very easy, removing hectic, repetitive, boring work and giving people free time to do the work they really want to do."
"Our organization used to have a process which took five business days to do: our monthly pricing update. This was a very manual process. Our very first bot built was to automate this process. Now, the bot runs in the background every month and the process takes less than a day to run."
"The speed-up and greater control over the quality of the processes have also led to savings in money and are increasing the happiness of the company's customers."
"It is easy to fix bug issues which you encounter in the post-production process."
"The impact on efficiency from Document Automation is significant, as it has given us approximately 70 to 80 percent of savings, with almost close to 90 percent efficiency and cost savings of approximately 70 to 80 percent of an FTE per person."
"This product has helped us a lot by improving and growing the business in different domains."
"The solution has a lot of strong features for the financial industry, it is very easy to use."
"Technical support is quite responsive."
"Technical support is very good; as a partner, we receive very good support from Appian."
"The most valuable features of Appian are the Low Code, robust Process Design, Run-time Management, Deployment, Interfaces, and Mobility."
"The product's most valuable feature is the low code aspect of development. We can develop an end-to-end VPN solution using a single platform."
"It provides us with real-time data on all connected systems in terms of how they're integrated with each other and how they are performing in a workflow manner."
"The most beneficial aspect of Appian is its data management capabilities and the process engine in general."
"It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"What I like most is the seamlessness of the workflow capabilities."
"Its performance, stability, and security are fine."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see the stabilization of Co-Pilot and integration with multiple products... In the future, I will require integration with SAP Oracle, Atlassian, and Service Now. The contact center vertical is important..."
"The main problem that I have with Automation Anywhere is the support. When I have problems that I cannot solve by myself, it is hard to achieve a good result with support. Language is another issue."
"On the user side, we have seen issues with user training."
"I believe Automation Anywhere needs to improve on product quality. Sometimes it has intermittent issues."
"The capability of understanding and extracting documents is not very good."
"This solution could be more stable because sometimes I see some bugs."
"I am looking for artificial intelligence and machine learning. I hope that they introduce them in A2019."
"The main request I have for Automation Anywhere is to focus more on technical demonstrations."
"Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built."
"The solution needs to have more features."
"Appian could improve their customer-facing initiatives."
"We did have some issues regarding the connectivity."
"The UI of Appian is more internal."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once."
"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."
"Its interface should be a bit more user-friendly."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost is anywhere between $10,000 and $100,000."
"The pricing of AA is similar to UiPath."
"Whatever investment, licensing, and resource costs together are put in for development and delivery, we are still at an ROI of 250 percent."
"Talk to your manager and try to procure an automation license for training. This will allow you to train people, so you can move to automation."
"I advise others that even as of right now, the setup cost and licensing cost to automate bots on Automation Anywhere is steep but it is worth the investment!"
"I think it's $5,500 per license."
"Our annual licensing costs for the entire company are $100,000."
"In terms of pricing, this is a good product."
"It's an enterprise tool and can be used by enterprise only. So it's a very expensive tool."
"Licensing of Appian is less expensive when compared to other BPMs in the market."
"The cost depends on the number of users, although I recommend taking an unlimited license."
"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."
"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."
"It is expensive, but powerful. I would recommend comparing against cheaper licensing products and open source."
"It's good value for the price."
"More flexibility in the licensing model is still needed because initially there were customers who are looking at only one or two use cases of business areas, but now the business areas are changing and there is a larger scope. One license model may not fit everyone. They need to be a little more flexible on the licensing model."
"We have a yearly license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business161
Midsize Enterprise83
Large Enterprise558
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.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.