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

AuraQuantic vs ProcessMaker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

AuraQuantic
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
16th
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
21st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (18th), Low-Code Development Platforms (21st), No-Code Development Platforms (15th), Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (13th)
ProcessMaker
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
37th
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
29th
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 March 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of AuraQuantic is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ProcessMaker is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AuraQuantic0.6%
ProcessMaker0.9%
Other98.5%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Emilio Valle - PeerSpot reviewer
Programmer at Banco de Guatemala
Responsive support, easy to use, and reliable
It helped a lot when we started using it with more images. Before, it was basic. With images, it's more effective. Users consider it more animated and user-friendly. We can easily track a process and know exactly where a process is. It's a low-code application. The solution is very easy to use. It is stable and reliable. The solution scales well. Technical support is extremely responsive.
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

"AuraQuantic's technical support is very good - they work well with partners and follow up on everything."
"AuraPortal has the best price for its process."
"AuraPortal is a beautiful solution for any company because you can do everything you want."
"AuraPortal provides several solutions embedded into one single platform that provides unbroken services to resolve almost any type of process for almost any industry segment."
"AuraPortal is very user-friendly and flexible."
"It's a low-code application."
"I chose AuraPortal due to its capabilities for implementing BPM solutions with limited programming skills, as interfaces can be developed very fast and the cycle time for developing applications or integration between different systems can be improved by 70-80%."
"AuraQuantic's most valuable features are the zero code, user-friendly mode, and integration."
"Its performance, stability, and security are fine."
"What I like most is the seamlessness of the workflow capabilities."
"What I like most is the seamlessness of the workflow capabilities."
"Its performance, stability, and security are fine."
 

Cons

"There should be a more affordable consulting pricing."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"The price could be better. It's quite expensive."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"We'd like it more animated. It would be useful if we could integrate GIFs, for example."
"I would like to see support for Unix, Oracle and other RDBMS."
"More documentation and the ability to extract different reports about different relations in the objects I use will help."
"AuraQuantic's price could be improved."
"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."
"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 price could be better. It's quite expensive."
"We have a yearly license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
No data available
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
ProcessMaker Workflow Management & BPM, ProcessMaker BPM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nissan, RSA Chile, New Millennia Group Plc (UK), TOYOTA, ArcelorMittal Brasil, KPN, Farmacia Luis Corbi, Farmacia del Paseo, Frutas Bean, IncAE Business School, BDO Argentina, Refinery of the Pacific, Balfego Grup, Fundacion Seneca, Technological Institute Maranosa, Coprusa Group, Constructec, University of Deusto, Tenco Shopping Centers, Spanish Railways Foundation, Arbora & Ausonia.
Tulsa Community College, Sirius College, Mcredit Vietnam, Oregon City Schools, Lakozy Toyota, HyperCube
Find out what your peers are saying about AuraQuantic vs. ProcessMaker and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.