We performed a comparison between AuraQuantic and Studio Creatio 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."AuraPortal is very user-friendly and flexible."
"It's a low-code application."
"AuraQuantic's most valuable features are the zero code, user-friendly mode, and integration."
"AuraPortal has the best price for its process."
"The low-code tools and business process management that Creatio provides are useful for our internal processes. It is also very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a low-code and no-code platform."
"The pre-configured CRM functionalities regarding the accounts management and contact activities is very good. It's easy to develop workflows."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its CRM functionality and the fact that it is a no-code solution"
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"Creatio also provides us with scalability, performance and agility."
"It is a low-code platform, that is very intuitive."
"It enables automating tasks and provides self-service options, ultimately improving efficiency and customer satisfaction."
"AuraQuantic's price could be improved."
"We'd like it more animated. It would be useful if we could integrate GIFs, for example."
"More documentation and the ability to extract different reports about different relations in the objects I use will help."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"The way bpm's infrastructure works, you can only have one data source on a page. It has to be connected to the object and you're pretty much locked in at that point... If you want to connect anything other than what exists in that object to that object, you're going to have to create a completely new home for it in that object."
"The mobile version of the solution could be improved. It's hard to customize it."
"It appears that at times, our partners might be using Google Translate, resulting in translations lacking context and not being entirely understandable."
"Studio Creatio is a new product in the market, making its lack of maturity an area of concern."
"Numerous options can make implementation confusing."
"HRM is an area where Studio Creatio lacks and needs to improve."
"It does not have the ability to run one single large process."
"They can improve the business rules for defining the type and quantity of the business load. They already seem to be working on this improvement. Integration with the social networks will be very appreciated by the companies. It will be very useful for communication between the company and customers, that is, B to C relationships. Most of the customers or users have smartphones, and they use a lot of social networks. Companies need to stay connected with the customers. They have enabled integration with WhatsApp and Telegram in recent releases, which has been very useful."
AuraQuantic is ranked 18th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 6 reviews while Studio Creatio is ranked 27th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 12 reviews. AuraQuantic is rated 8.8, while Studio Creatio is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AuraQuantic writes "Responsive support, easy to use, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Studio Creatio writes "Leveraging process automation and advanced tools for streamlined operations". AuraQuantic is most compared with Appian, Camunda, Bizagi and IBM BPM, whereas Studio Creatio is most compared with Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service, Mendix, Microsoft Power Apps, Bizagi and Camunda. See our AuraQuantic vs. Studio Creatio 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.
