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

Automic Automation vs Flowable comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Automic Automation
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
104
Ranking in other categories
Workload Automation (2nd)
Flowable
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
22nd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies category, the mindshare of Automic Automation is 0.4%. The mindshare of Flowable is 4.4%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Automic Automation0.4%
Flowable4.4%
Other95.2%
Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
 

Featured Reviews

Peter Grundler - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant at Tricise
Helps to move away from manual tasks and offers wide platform support and web-based interface
Customers want to move away from manual monitoring and checking processes. Automating these processes helps in time-saving and reduces human error. When you automate business processes, it reduces mistakes. It eliminates the risk of manual errors such as typos. There is a 20% to 30% reduction in human error. It fulfills all the needs when it comes to visibility and control across various operating platforms. It is the perfect product for managing processes that span multiple operating platforms. Automic Automation has the widest platform support compared to other products, such as Control-M, Tivoli from IBM, or Stonebranch. It definitely helps with compliance processes. We have had a lot of customers for two years with a focus on compliance, and it works. They were successful. Due to the fact that our customers can automate a lot of things, it reduces operating costs. It is hard to give a number because the savings are different for each customer. If a customer never had any automation, there could be about 80% savings after implementing Automic Automation, whereas for a customer who already has automated tasks, the difference will be less by adding Automic Automation. They might see 5% to 10% more savings. Automic Automation helps improve our ability to meet SLAs. In the recent versions, SLA management has been integrated, which previously was an external component. Because a lot of customers used it and asked Broadcom to implement SLA management into the workload engine, Broadcom included it. We see more and more customers running their SLA management via the Automic Automation product.
Simon Greener - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect at Cohga Pty Ltd
Helps to control the workflow and business process components of customers' operations but OSGi integration can be challenging
I'd rate my experience with the initial setup of Flowable at about a three out of ten, but for our developers, it's probably closer to a six. I found it challenging due to the complexity of the user and help documents and the fact that much of the Flowable documentation and tutorials are focused on cloud-based implementations. Since we're primarily interested in basic components like BPMN models and form design, which aren't included in the product, the learning process was more difficult for me. In contrast, our developers are more comfortable diving into the code and technology stack, which allows them to be more proactive in their approach. The deployment took three months to complete. We're still in the deployment process. Our main challenge is integrating the Flowable process engine into our product, which uses OSGi. This has led to complexity in managing the Java versions and dependencies, as the tool has around 150 Java files. We could have chosen to interact with Flowable via a Docker container and the REST API, which would have isolated the OSGi Java dependencies, but we decided to integrate it directly. This has required resolving Java version control issues and upgrades, leading to various development challenges that must be addressed. It is a learning process for all of us. As an integrated solutions architect, I would have probably opted for the Docker route rather than the direct OSGi integration chosen by the developers. However, since they went with the OSGi integration, it's taking us longer to complete the deployment. Currently, we have one full-time developer dedicated to deployment, along with one part-time developer, and my involvement at about a quarter of my time. So, we have about two people working on deployment. As for maintenance, we're not entirely sure yet. Given our direct OSGi integration choice instead of Docker and REST, maintenance may be more challenging. However, we'll have a clearer picture once deployment is complete.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The system has been designed to be as dynamic and versatile as the business processes and teams that own them."
"Since we bought it, we have not had any big issues. We are satisfied with it. We are able to run multiple jobs. We can build and run complicated jobs. There are no issues."
"We have seen big improvements in automation and automated tasks allowing our people to work on more important things for the company, as well as getting financial data quicker."
"Automic Automation's primary advantage over competitors lies in its robust SAP integration."
"It is 100% stable. We have no downtime. We have 24/7 production throughout the year."
"This solution saves our organization time, in terms of management, is more systematic, gives us more control, and is easy to learn."
"Allowed us to almost fully automate our batch schedule and to provide our Operations team with a single interface for monitoring batch and automated system processes."
"The stability is very good, we have not had any crashes or downtime with it in our testing, we are very happy with it and it runs pretty fast."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the process engine. It allows us to define BPM-based workflows, deploy them into our process engine, and interact with them within our product."
 

Cons

"On a scale of one to 10, I would say, probably a seven. We have had some issues recently going through the process of trying to upgrade from version 10 to 12."
"A little less button clicking, in the navigation of the tool itself would also help. There is a lot out there, and I understand that's what keeps the tool robust. It keeps our options open, but it's a bit click-y sometimes. To get where you need to go, you have to go through 10 levels."
"The direction in which the UI is going is concerning to me; it does not offer the security context we would need to implement future versions."
"The SSH agent is missing in version 12.1."
"There are too many bugs to be solved after a version upgrade. We are working on the limits of an architecture with 16,000 platforms. It is impossible to test everything out in the software lab of CA."
"We have some problems with updates where some functions are changed, so you have to check your whole system to see if everything is still running."
"The versioning and support for the lifecycle of Automic's developed solution is what we were missing. However, this is coming in version 12.2, so I am looking forward to seeing how it works."
"Our area with the CA solution for DR is not really concerning directly to Automic, but to all of the DevOps, a word which is something that everybody is trying to touch on today in their daily business. There is also some gap that's a little bit hard to understand or to implement because not all the organizations are the same. When you are adopting DevOps, you may need to be more flexible in your processes."
"In my opinion, areas of improvement for Flowable include the management and creation of forms within the open-source components and the documentation and examples provided. While the cloud-based Flowable implementation with no-code features is attractive, we prefer more control over integration, especially since we deploy our product onto AWS. We also want to avoid additional licensing fees for Flowable runtime user components on top of our software development and implementation charges."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing was client-wise, but they are changing it to execution-wise pricing. So, we are in negotiation."
"It has helped us reduce costs."
"We have received a lot of time and cost efficiencies from using the product."
"I only know that AWA is cheaper than Control-M, but I'm not aware of the numbers."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"You do not need any humans to start jobs, so you can save a lot of money."
"Automatic is heavily integrated in our organization. The cost to change would be a huge factor for us, and we have not found any other product that is better out there."
"Our company had paid around 5,000 to 6,000 USD per license for a month."
"Since the tool is open-source, we don't have to pay anything for it. It's free to download and use, which is great for us. If Flowable hadn't been available as open source and required a license fee for us to integrate it into our product, we might not have chosen it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies solutions are best for your needs.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise67
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Automic Workload Automation?
The pricing was client-wise, but they are changing it to execution-wise pricing. So, we are in negotiation.
What needs improvement with Automic Workload Automation?
Automic Automation has some disadvantages; it is more simplified, and sometimes it can be complicated. The technical support by Automic, provided by Broadcom, is good with the same blocking support.
What is your primary use case for Automic Workload Automation?
I have been dealing with Automic Automation for probably around ten years. I have been both a partner with Automic, with Broadcom and with Autosys.
What do you like most about Flowable?
The tool's most valuable feature is the process engine. It allows us to define BPM-based workflows, deploy them into our process engine, and interact with them within our product.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Flowable?
Since the tool is open-source, we don't have to pay anything for it. It's free to download and use, which is great for us. If Flowable hadn't been available as open source and required a license fe...
What needs improvement with Flowable?
In my opinion, areas of improvement for Flowable include the management and creation of forms within the open-source components and the documentation and examples provided. While the cloud-based Fl...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Automic Dollar Universe
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
1. Adobe 2. BMW 3. Cisco 4. Dell 5. Ericsson 6. Ford 7. General Electric 8. Honda 9. IBM 10. Johnson & Johnson 11. Kia Motors 12. LG Electronics 13. Microsoft 14. Nike 15. Oracle 16. PepsiCo 17. Qualcomm 18. Red Bull 19. Samsung 20. Toyota 21. Uber 22. Visa 23. Walmart 24. Xerox 25. Yahoo 26. Zara 27. Accenture 28. Bank of America 29. Citigroup 30. Deutsche Bank 31. ExxonMobil 32. Facebook
Find out what your peers are saying about UiPath, Automation Anywhere, Camunda and others in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies. Updated: March 2026.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.