No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Camunda vs Flowable comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Automation Anywhere
Sponsored
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
668
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (2nd), Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (2nd), Process Mining (1st), Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (1st), Agentic Automation (1st), AI Legal & Compliance (1st), AI Finance & Accounting (2nd), AI Procurement & Supply Chain (1st)
Camunda
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (1st), Business Process Management (BPM) (1st), Process Automation (1st), AI Orchestration Frameworks (3rd), Agentic Automation (5th), AI Agent Builders (9th)
Flowable
Ranking in Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies
27th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (27th)
 

Featured Reviews

Venkat Sivaprakash - PeerSpot reviewer
Management Consultant at Accenture
Has significantly improved document-driven workflows and reduced processing time across finance and HR functions
Automation Anywhere has evolved significantly and upgraded itself to provide agentic AI and AI-based automation solutions for document automation. The product has matured considerably over time. We can create workflows that can call an API. We can include prompts in particular workflows for ChatGPT-related functions, connecting to an LLM and RAG to perform tasks. For document automation, modern features are available to train documents, ensuring high accuracy and repeatability over time. The system is very easy to use. I recently completed a course in document automation, typically designed for people involved in coding and technical aspects. Though I understand coding comprehensively, I don't do actual coding. The course was very accessible. Currently, extensive coding isn't necessary due to the hybrid model incorporating GenAI aspects, low-code, no-code capabilities, APIs, and numerous pre-built objects in Automation Anywhere. The features include GenAI-driven prompting methods and workflow creation capabilities. In these workflows, we can create decision boxes and call APIs without coding. We simply pull objects, drop them, connect them, and add minimal coding when needed. The most crucial aspect isn't coding but rather sizing the automation and fleshing out the details. Automation Co-pilot takes notes and performs automated analysis. It can extract details from videos, summarize conversations, and provide detailed information. During calls, it identifies instructions and performs tasks such as preparing reports and reconciliation. Automation Anywhere can also connect with Microsoft Co-pilot. Through Co-pilot, real-time operations can be executed, allowing direct interaction between vendors and automation through this component.
PV
Workflow orchestration has supported complex enforcement processes and improves human task integration
Areas that have room for improvement in Camunda include the user interface. We moved from Camunda 7 to Camunda 8, and previously we had Camunda 7 Cockpit, and now we have Operate. The UI of Operate is less user-friendly. It may be a little more modern, but it is less user-friendly, so some insights are missed. The UI could be improved. Another topic is something that should have been recently solved in Camunda 8, but in Camunda 7, we had a case management system based on Camunda, and we had our own identifiers in our system. It was easier in Camunda 7 to link these identifications, the business identification to the process identification, and in Camunda 8, this was not implemented until the 8.10 release. We really missed that feature, as it made it very difficult to embed and especially for debugging. The combination with the new Operate instead of Camunda 7 Cockpit made it difficult to find specific running processes. The maintenance of Camunda is somewhat complex. Recently, we had to move from 8.8 to 8.9 or 8.10, and everything was broken, which cost us a lot of time to repair and revert. The complexity is particularly evident because of the architectural changes Camunda made when moving from Camunda 7 to Camunda 8. It took about three years to make Camunda 8 mature, and sometimes it seems they realized they made a wrong decision by switching to a completely different approach. It is not just a matter of pushing a button and installing it; it has a bigger impact than expected, which is indeed one of the downsides we recently faced. The ability to observe and control processes at runtime, related to Operate, rates at a six in my assessment, so that could definitely be improved.
Simon Greener - PeerSpot reviewer
Solutions Architect at Cohga Pty Ltd
Helps to control the workflow and business process components of customers' operations but OSGi integration can be challenging
I'd rate my experience with the initial setup of Flowable at about a three out of ten, but for our developers, it's probably closer to a six. I found it challenging due to the complexity of the user and help documents and the fact that much of the Flowable documentation and tutorials are focused on cloud-based implementations. Since we're primarily interested in basic components like BPMN models and form design, which aren't included in the product, the learning process was more difficult for me. In contrast, our developers are more comfortable diving into the code and technology stack, which allows them to be more proactive in their approach. The deployment took three months to complete. We're still in the deployment process. Our main challenge is integrating the Flowable process engine into our product, which uses OSGi. This has led to complexity in managing the Java versions and dependencies, as the tool has around 150 Java files. We could have chosen to interact with Flowable via a Docker container and the REST API, which would have isolated the OSGi Java dependencies, but we decided to integrate it directly. This has required resolving Java version control issues and upgrades, leading to various development challenges that must be addressed. It is a learning process for all of us. As an integrated solutions architect, I would have probably opted for the Docker route rather than the direct OSGi integration chosen by the developers. However, since they went with the OSGi integration, it's taking us longer to complete the deployment. Currently, we have one full-time developer dedicated to deployment, along with one part-time developer, and my involvement at about a quarter of my time. So, we have about two people working on deployment. As for maintenance, we're not entirely sure yet. Given our direct OSGi integration choice instead of Docker and REST, maintenance may be more challenging. However, we'll have a clearer picture once deployment is complete.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It has changed our mindset, as people have started to think about automating things and come up with new perspectives, alternatives, or improvements by which automation can be implemented."
"By automating those processes we achieved high ROI, great customer satisfaction, better STP, reduced manual work, reduced processing time, high accuracy, and 24/7 working capacity with the AA bots."
"Overall, I would rate Automation Anywhere a nine out of ten."
"Since implementing the solution, the tasks are taking place in a seamless manner. As long as the process is not changed, there is the ease of replicability. Repeatable tasks constantly get done without any challenges."
"Automating back-office processes and automation workflows has positively impacted my organization, as before automating, the human effort has been significantly reduced, and we can cut off three to four hours of their work per day and reduce it by using this bot, reducing the daily task from four hours to 30 minutes and saving three and a half hours per day or 70 hours over 20 working days."
"I feel that it save us time and provides ROI as a monetary benefit because it reduces FTE, the number of headcount working for a particular project."
"Object Cloning is the most valuable feature I have found for automating a website or a process that includes multiple mouse clicks."
"It is really helpful that this solution is deployed in the cloud."
"The ease with which I can define workflows is most valuable. The latest updates and flexibility that it provides around a task activity are interesting for me."
"The BPMN diagram is valuable. For our use case of transferring money from one account to another, the connections have to be done in the traditional financial ways. There are a lot of unexpected errors and a lot of instability with this kind of system, and we are using Camunda in order to have clear flows. With BPMN, I can show a flow to my business partner, and the business team can easily understand what's going on. The technical team can understand what the implementation is, and we can model different errors and the process for recovering from these errors."
"Its flexibility stands out as the most valuable feature."
"We can easily define and deploy business processes. Camunda provides the tools that allow business people to design business processes. We don't have to have developers for it. It is so easy to use that our business people can go into the tool and model their business processes. We get time to do other things than just designing business processes."
"We chose to use Camunda because it's open-source, easy to develop, and scalable, plus we were able to develop some of the enterprise features offered with the license in-house only."
"The speed and execution of DMN was a big selling point for us. It's very good at conducting business processes that are easily modeled and presented in a way that's easy to understand."
"We like the idea of working with Cawemo because it enables us to keep on working, remotely or not. It allows us to collaborate between areas. It's easy to model and easy to use"
"Camunda Platform has a very good interface for workflow and business process design."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the process engine. It allows us to define BPM-based workflows, deploy them into our process engine, and interact with them within our product."
 

Cons

"We have had issues with stability in the past, and there should be a function that helps you to find out what is wrong with your environment that is causing the automation to fail."
"The main disadvantage of Automation Anywhere is its high cost."
"The automated regression testing could be better. I need to build my own testing suite, and I know other tools have built-in testing suites. That is an area that's very weak in this platform."
"The bot insides should come in the same package versus having it as a different bundle by itself. If we could have this product come with all the inside solutions altogether, that would help."
"I would like centralized orchestration and better exception handling in the next release."
"My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is mixed. It is somewhere in between, not the most cost-efficient but also not the highest cost, so it can be better."
"Cost-wise, it should be reduced."
"One way Automation Anywhere can be improved is in ticketing."
"It would be better if the tool were made less reliant on Java."
"Customization and tech stack could be up-to-date."
"The solution's pricing and scalability could be improved."
"In terms of areas for improvement, we are struggling with organizing the BPMN workflows."
"Camunda doesn't have a strong forms designer."
"When addressing a complex and extensive process, the domain it belongs to, be it banking, healthcare, or HR, requires widespread access."
"The support definitely can be improved. Apart from that, the language should be extendable to other platforms. If I want to write, I'll run a different platform, like Python code on top of it, or COBOL code on top of it, and it should support those languages."
"The product must provide more videos and training materials."
"In my opinion, areas of improvement for Flowable include the management and creation of forms within the open-source components and the documentation and examples provided. While the cloud-based Flowable implementation with no-code features is attractive, we prefer more control over integration, especially since we deploy our product onto AWS. We also want to avoid additional licensing fees for Flowable runtime user components on top of our software development and implementation charges."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is subscription-based. They have different schemes. The price depends on how you negotiate with the local partner or local representative in your country."
"It's somewhat pricier than some of the other tools that we've used, and the breakout between the different applications is also somewhat costly. If they can make it a little more cost-effective or bundle packages a little bit more, that would be beneficial."
"They sell it by license, but if they could charge by case or by interaction, that might be better. Right now, it's expensive when you want to scale or use them for simple processes."
"We're paying a monthly subscription fee for the bot and for services. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
"The product starts at $10,000 and then it's up to you regarding how much you can consume."
"We're just starting to renew our license, and we were quoted $115,000 without the IQ Bot. The IQ Bot is another $30,000. This is with very limited pages, as we go through our first projects. The majority of the cost was for ten days of onsite training."
"I think the pricing is reasonable, but clients often perceive it as expensive."
"Automation Anywhere might have a higher upfront cost than some competitors, but its extensive features and seamless integration with other tools can save organizations money in the long run."
"The price of the solution is reasonable."
"The price is competitive with products like Bonitasoft and RHPAM (Red Hat Process Automation Manager). We have two versions of Camunda. The first version was open source, without support, but then we got a supported version."
"There is a bit of scope for improvement in how the licensing and pricing are done. They are based on the number of processing instances you execute on the cluster... but on the self-hosted mode, the pricing model should be customized."
"In Africa, the cost of deployment is an important factor to consider since it adds to the overall cost. This might be the only drawback to using it."
"The product's price depends on the number of processes that need to be automated or where the orchestration part needs to be used. The product is affordable for medium and large enterprises."
"The evaluation of my customers on pricing is that it is reasonable."
"I tried to get some information about buying the license for the solution, but I found it kind of hard to understand the business model."
"I think Camunda BPM can improve their licensing costs. It isn't easy to find clients with Camunda BPM licenses mainly because it's quite expensive."
"Since the tool is open-source, we don't have to pay anything for it. It's free to download and use, which is great for us. If Flowable hadn't been available as open source and required a license fee for us to integrate it into our product, we might not have chosen it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
31%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business162
Midsize Enterprise86
Large Enterprise565
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise39
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
It depends on your use case. Is it simply to automate a couple of processes? Is it to augment a human team? AA is ver...
How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
From my experience using AA tool, it depends on the applications that you want to automate, because there some applic...
How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
It is a highly preferred RPA tool. You can check my Automation Anywhere Review to know more.
How does Bonita compare with Camunda Platform?
One of the things we like best about Bonita is that you can create without coding - it is a low-code platform. With B...
Which do you prefer - Appian or Camunda Platform?
Appian is fast when building simple to medium solutions. This solution offers simple drag-and-drop functionality with...
Which would you choose - Camunda Platform or Apache Airflow?
Camunda Platform allows for visual demonstration and presentation of business process flows. The flexible Java-based ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Automation Anywhere, Testing Anywhere, Automation Anywhere Enterprise, Agentic Process Automation System (Now Certified for WorkSpaces)
Camunda BPM
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Linkedin, Cisco, Juniper Networks, DellEMC, Comcast, Mastercard, Quest Diagnostics
24 Hour Fitness, AT&T Inc., Atlassian, Autodesk, Barclays, BNP Paribas, CapitalOne, Commerzbank AG, Deutsche Telekom, Fujitsu, Gainsight, Generali, Goldman Sachs, Provinzial, NatWest Group, Panasonic, R-Kom, Swisscom AG, VHV Group, Warner Music, WellPoint, Zalando
1. Adobe 2. BMW 3. Cisco 4. Dell 5. Ericsson 6. Ford 7. General Electric 8. Honda 9. IBM 10. Johnson & Johnson 11. Kia Motors 12. LG Electronics 13. Microsoft 14. Nike 15. Oracle 16. PepsiCo 17. Qualcomm 18. Red Bull 19. Samsung 20. Toyota 21. Uber 22. Visa 23. Walmart 24. Xerox 25. Yahoo 26. Zara 27. Accenture 28. Bank of America 29. Citigroup 30. Deutsche Bank 31. ExxonMobil 32. Facebook
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, BMC, Pega and others in Process Automation. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.