We performed a comparison between Bizagi and Hyland OnBase 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."Bizagi is a very useful tool because it does not require you to program. The user logic is very easy to understand even for people who are not engineers or developers."
"Great software for managing my business. I think this is the best business process management software."
"This solution is easy to use and it is a good tool for process modeling."
"What I find most valuable is the flexibility, I find it very easy to use and very flexible for my purpose. I can use it without any particular problem, and it's very intuitive and easy to understand."
"Process management is easy with Bizagi; validating processes and assigning resources is straightforward."
"Its cost is the most valuable. It is not as expensive. It is also easy to make different types of processes for the users."
"The natural notation is the best feature of Bizagi because it makes it compatible with other products."
"Bizagi is simple. It's simple to learn."
"The most valuable features are that it's very secure and provides audit trails for our documents."
"We found the setup process to be okay since they do offer a troubleshooting guide."
"The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities."
"OnBase is a remarkable tool. It is a well-done product. Hyland has a lot of experience in building it and looking for new things for clients in terms of functionalities. It has amazing stability, and it can grow horizontally and vertically. It is built for growth. Their technical support is also quite good and available throughout the year."
"I like the cloud and its integrability."
"The retention module is one of the most valuable features. Whatever we scan onto the system can be identified and we are notified when the records are due to be disposed."
"The product must make automation easier."
"Its performance needs to be improved. The main thing is that it is limited, especially in terms of the response times. When the processes become a bit large, it is very awkward to work with the Bizagi modeler. When you have already modeled but start to rearrange, it is quite a bit of an effort to change the stuff. When you rearrange lanes or have new structures, it goes rather squiggly up and down and so on, which could be improved. The visual outputs of the DIREPs of the process models are pixelated and have a bad image quality. It is a PNG or JPEG, and you cannot export it as a PDF. When you have rather large processes, you should be able to arrange them hierarchically. Currently, it is not supported. If you use sub-processes and inflate a process, suddenly the arrangement is totally different, and although you know the process, you have to look where is it now. You need a good understanding of the levels of your processes before you start in Bizagi. It can have automatic support for optimal presentation. In BPM, you should have it from the top left to the bottom right. However, in most cases, people don't know how they should arrange it. Therefore, it would be nice to have a suggestion system for different arrangements to be able to better present the process."
"The solution's interface could be a bit more user-friendly and I would like to see more integrations with other Office products, not just Office 365."
"The open source version lacks the option to publish."
"The technical support is not fast enough and should be improved."
"It would be helpful if they added some extra features in the next update."
"It needs some better notation functionality."
"The solution was very limited."
"The dashboards do have some room for improvement as compared to the other vendors which are there in the market."
"An area for improvement would be the training - getting our people up to speed on how to use it required more training than we expected due to the complexity of the solution."
"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."
"The look and feel could be better. The integration with the user could be better. It could also be more user-friendly."
"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy. It is getting better, but it is not yet good enough. Other products are comparatively doing better in terms of the user interface. I have been hearing about Box, which is very easy to use and learn for the users. OnBase has to work on this aspect. It should have BPM capabilities. We compete with tools that provide the BPM feature and support those standards. They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."
"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."
Bizagi is ranked 7th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 78 reviews while Hyland OnBase is ranked 25th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews. Bizagi is rated 8.4, while Hyland OnBase is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Bizagi writes "A flexible, customizable solution that reduced time to market, but the UI and customer support could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Hyland OnBase writes "Stable content and workflow management solution with a valuable retention module". Bizagi is most compared with Camunda, Visio, Bonita, Microsoft Power Apps and ARIS BPA, whereas Hyland OnBase is most compared with Alfresco, SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM and IBM FileNet. See our Bizagi vs. Hyland OnBase report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors and best Low-Code Development Platforms 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.
