We compared Camunda Platform and IBM BPM based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Camunda Platform seems to be the superior solution. Because users are divided over how easy IBM BPM is to deploy and because of its high price, users feel Camunda Platform is a better investment.
"The most valuable feature is the scheduling."
"Easy to use and easy to integrate into the products and applications we provide for our customers."
"It is open-source. It supports microservice orchestration. This is what we are really interested in. We can customize our products depending on the use cases."
"We can share, discuss, and develop the model together — from a distance. It's really helped us during these times of isolation."
"The flexibility is great."
"Provides an easy way to integrate with the architectural environment."
"Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure. It is more elaborate."
"The solution is good for data models."
"IBM BPM's best features include document sharing, management document creation, widget and barcode creation, and integration."
"The most valuable features are the integration capabilities - BPM can connect with almost any legacy or advanced system."
"It has an elaborated way to explore the IBM BPM processes."
"IBM BPM is stable."
"The performance is fine."
"IBM BPM is a stable solution."
"It is a very powerful solution."
"Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly."
"In the future, I would definitely like to see the process administration (migration, audit, tracking) and process evaluation (optimize) features added to the community edition."
"Initial setup can be quite complex."
"Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved."
"The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself."
"We have faced problems with the performance."
"An improvement would be to support Angular 2 instead of AngularJS, which is quite old."
"Would be helpful if there were additional out-of-the-box activities."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"The coaches and the user interface are the areas that can be improved a lot. It is good in terms of data processing, but the UI, scripting, and coaches are not very user-friendly and developer-friendly. Performance is always an issue. The scripting and the pattern that it uses are very tedious for new developers to understand, and it takes time to master it in depth. When comparing IBM BPM with IBM APN, a lot of things are provided out of the box in IBM APN. We don't have to write code or a Java connector to make a functionality work. It would be very helpful and time-saving for developers if IBM BPM is improved in this area to provide many functionalities or drag-and-drop options so that the developers don't have to write the code."
"The front end is not customised for a good user experience."
"Some of the features are not enough for my business. We need to build custom user management for the many end users affected by BPM."
"There needs to be better documentation for IBM BPM in a central place. There is not any standard documentation for each component available and has been a barrier for developers."
"You must have good experience to work with it. It is not that easy. Its installation is complex, especially in the new version for business automation, and it could be improved. It has a safety application embedded inside it, and you need to do a lot of configuration to install it. I have been working for two days to resolve an issue."
"IBM BPM integrated with Spark UI and the UI is now much better, but they still need to improve the UI because competitors have predefined templates and other additional features. In these competitor's solutions, you are able to use the templates, map your data, and the form is ready to use. With this solution, you need to write a lot of code to have the same quality as the competitor's templates. It would be a benefit to make this platform more towards low-code or no-code."
"The stability varies because it involves a lot of other components like databases, so sometimes if something goes wrong there, it can't recover from the fatal errors."
"The price and the overall installation process could be improved."
Camunda is the leader in process orchestration software. Our software helps orchestrate complex business processes that span people, systems, and devices. With Camunda, business users collaborate with developers to model and automate end-to-end processes using BPMN-powered flowcharts that run with the speed, scale, and resiliency required to compete in today’s digital-first world. Hundreds of enterprises such as Allianz, ING, and Vodafone design, automate, and improve mission-critical business processes with Camunda to drive digital transformation. To learn more visit camunda.com.
Camunda Platform is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 33 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 27 reviews. Camunda Platform is rated 8.2, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Camunda Platform writes "Highly valuable for orchestrating complex business processes, solving many problems, and making the business side understand what we are talking about". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "A very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users, but it is expensive, and the Eclipse-based tool has performance issues when you have a lot of developers". Camunda Platform is most compared with Apache Airflow, Pega BPM, Bizagi, Bonita and Appian, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM, Appian, Apache Airflow and K2. See our Camunda Platform vs. IBM BPM report.
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.