"The number of client implementations and cross-language capabilities to support multiple frameworks is very pluggable compared to Pega. It's also more portable."
"I think that the positives of Camunda Platform are that our customers can start with the free version. I think it is the most important."
"It's user friendly, much better than most tools I have seen."
"I love that Camunda is a very developer-friendly platform, and my customers have evaluated the pricing as reasonable."
"The flexibility is great."
"The most valuable feature is the scheduling."
"Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure. It is more elaborate."
"I can use any other tools to create services and the UI, and then use them together with the Camunda BPMN engine."
"The most valuable feature for the organization is the Document Store."
"The solution has helped us automate business processes."
"This product does the job in terms of executing the workflow."
"Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly."
"The installation was straightforward."
"I liked its robustness the most. It was a very robust platform in my experience. It seemed like a very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users and hammering at the system."
"IBM BPM is both scalable and stable."
"The solution is stable."
"It lacks some preset features and configurations which would make it more plug-and-play for customers."
"In terms of features, it meets my needs, but I would like Camunda to have an office in Brazil and provide training in Portuguese. They should provide regional support and training courses in Portuguese."
"There are a few things that I'm missing. For instance, the user interface creator, which I know other systems have, like Aurea or Lombardi, which are IBM solutions. The interface creator, including the data model creator or some module which would allow the users who are not programmers or business consultants and who are not technically skilled in database and Java programming, to create data models and user interfaces."
"Community support is basically what I'm looking for. Other than that, it is okay for now."
"In the future, I would like to see better transactional integrity."
"The cockpit features of the Camunda Platform can be improved to make it a bit more user-friendly, in terms of providing a bit more user experience for non-technical users. There could be some additional documentation added."
"I have faced problems in bringing up the Cockpit in terms of GUI processes. I think that there is room for improvement in those areas."
"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."
"The configuration is not that easy, and the initial deployment took three months."
"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."
"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."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"The front end is not customised for a good user experience."
"Our developers are complaining that it's too complex to maintain."
"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."
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 31 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 29 reviews. Camunda Platform is rated 8.2, while IBM BPM is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Camunda Platform writes "Component reusability saves us development time, but the learning curve is too steep". 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, Bonita, Bizagi 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.