We performed a comparison between CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] and Pega BPM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."The product is stable. This is the reason that we are using Automic, in some cases, because of its stability and features."
"It provides a simple reduction of headcount and also a reduction of run through time."
"Jobs are planned automatically to eliminate the need to plan them manually. It also saves us effort because there is no need to create job objects manually."
"If I have a higher workload with smaller machines, it is easy to increase everything."
"Pega BPM's most valuable features are case management, integration, the convenience of using REST APIs, and the ease of changing things at the UI level."
"Overall, the ability to integrate with multiple applications and effective case management is the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Pega BPM is its architecture."
"The solution has very helpful technical support."
"Application development is very rapid. A lot of code gets reused while building the applications, which is something we highly appreciate."
"The stability has been good. We haven't had any issues."
"The workflows are the most valuable features, particularly for us, because we were attempting to automate processes by utilizing workflows to provide a hands-off comparison between the bot and the human."
"There is a feature to accelerate the development so that business analysts can directly create their user stories and assign the task to the developers."
"What I am missing today is robotics. If Automic would like to stay as one of the biggest automation engines on the market, they have to find an option with a robotics solution."
"In the last two years or so, Automic has not invested as much in the product as we would have expected."
"The unit testing needs to improve, as well as the user interface."
"We need more light retail BPM tools within the Pega system. However, Pega is mostly for big companies."
"Currently, there isn't any feature I want to be added in the next release of Pega BPM because Pega always adds new features that my team welcomes and looks forward to learning. One area for improvement in the solution is the long learning curve, but after that, you'll find Pega BPM easy to use."
"This is a quite expensive product."
"First-time customers will find its licensing tricky. The technical support team for this solution could be faster in resolving tickets."
"I think there is room for improvement in the low code/ no code environment that they're promoting now. That needs to be aligned a little bit more. I still feel that it is not that friendly for a person who has no experience with Pega to just go in and try to create something."
"Sometimes when we are patching some data from the database, we are getting added as a timeout."
"The UI part needs improvement."
More CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Process Automation while Pega BPM is ranked 2nd in Process Automation with 55 reviews. CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is rated 10.0, while Pega BPM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] writes "Automation of job object creation increased the quality and quantity of our job requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pega BPM writes "Low code with great APIs and good flexibility". CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Pega BPM is most compared with ServiceNow, Camunda, Appian, Microsoft Power Apps and IBM BPM.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.