We performed a comparison between Blue Prism Cloud and HyperScience based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The user performance is the most valuable feature."
"We can save on staff costs by automating processes."
"Blue Prism is well known for being used in banking and security organizations. Its security is superior compared to UiPath and other RPA tools."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to write custom code."
"The primary focus lies in integrating the three major cloud platforms with Blue Prism Cloud: Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, and GCP. This integration goes beyond security measures for the primary template policies. It also includes addressing compliance requirements. For instance, I can incorporate specific compliance templates and policies generated in Blue Prism and integrate them with local templates for ISO 27001 and GDPR, particularly concerning software tools and headsets. This integration eliminates the need for auditing and reviewing technical details individually. Instead, I can simply examine the container report. This approach proves beneficial when clients heavily rely on container environments."
"The technical support team of Blue Prism Cloud is very good...I rate the support a ten out of ten."
"The tool saves us from repetitive and mundane tasks. We don’t have to write, record or copy data from Excel. The product helps us save time. We save money as well since people doing this task are on various other automation tasks. The chance for repetitive entries is also reduced because the tool helps us make one-time entries."
"The most valuable feature is security."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"Improvement should be per customer requirements."
"Blue Prism might consider adding package options to allow users to come onboard in different ways that meet their needs rather than buying in to the whole package."
"There's a need to deal with unstructured input with RPA."
"The issue is that it is not dynamic or intelligent."
"The solution is unable to read some UI components in legacy systems."
"Blue Prism should adopt a low-code approach. Most RPA vendors only provide what they call a "form builder." A low-code designer would enable us to build a custom UI."
"It takes a while to get up and running."
"I think that there are some improvements in the product performance that are needed in Blue Prism Cloud...The initial setup of the product needs a lot of time and effort."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
Blue Prism Cloud is ranked 8th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 38 reviews while HyperScience is ranked 5th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews. Blue Prism Cloud is rated 8.0, while HyperScience is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Blue Prism Cloud writes "It helps us save on staff costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". Blue Prism Cloud is most compared with Blue Prism, Microsoft Power Automate, UiPath, Robocorp and SAP Intelligent RPA, whereas HyperScience is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, UiPath, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate and Tungsten RPA. See our Blue Prism Cloud vs. HyperScience report.
See our list of best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) 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.