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

"This solution saves time when completing our pharmaceutical processes, which allows things to progress faster to the FDA."
"Because of the presence of Automation, it helped my company deal with banks in this field and to know many important processes in banks and private companies."
"There have been a lot of challenges in terms of interfacing with the customer ERPs. So, we have been building tools and interfaces using bots to write back into these custom ERPs. Specifically, in the area where I work, this has been very helpful."
"With the cash flow generated just on the one bot we had operating, it's paid for itself in the first month."
"Since our implementation, I can vouch for the fact that it is very easy to use. You do not need to know a lot of coding, even the business users, who have virtually no idea of coding, can easily operate it. They can run their bots and have the analysis ready for higher management. This is something which provides a great ease of use, and also in part why it is scalable."
"Document automation has been phenomenal."
"From an SAP point of view, we have in-built features. They have integrated everything together, so it's much easier for us to use that."
"Automation Anywhere is a good platform with extensive capabilities that has innovated and kept their platform more centered and relevant in the market by introducing AI and agentic capabilities."
"We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we are sharing it with our business users."
"Provides an easy way to integrate with the architectural environment."
"I see improvements with Camunda mainly in quality and service, as the best return on investment is less work for internal teams and enhanced value for end customers, allowing less experienced personnel to effectively work with Camunda and understand their responsibilities, alleviating dependence on specific knowledgeable employees."
"When I compare it with other BPM tools, like IBM, it is great, open source, and free when you use the community version."
"Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure; it is more elaborate, divided across the platform with integration separated from the UI and internal work, and it also integrates well."
"We evaluated Appian for my current job but it's less beneficial if your aim is to have your customers at the front end, and we took the middle road when we went with Camunda and the flexibility it offers is a big advantage for us."
"Camunda Platform has a very good interface for workflow and business process design."
"I've found the active community most valuable but it also provides you with a lot of other features."
"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 a new feature share in Automation Anywhere, but it does not migrate automatically from the previous version to the new one."
"Automation Anywhere could benefit from a more technical focus."
"Debugging can be particularly tricky; identifying the exact reasons for bot failures can be time-consuming."
"OCR capability needs to become better."
"The implementation process is complex, as there is integration with other applications."
"The platform has good capabilities, but it could improve by providing more development options."
"However, the AI Sense Recorder is too slow, so they can enhance its features for easier user experience."
"More structured and unstructured data collection will be a challenge. While we have the IQ Bot tool, the success rate at the beginning will be lower. It will be around 20 to 30 percent at the start because you need to train the bot at regular intervals. Of course, this depends on the data. This area could use be improvement."
"The product must provide more videos and training materials."
"The setup process is a drawback as it has many dependencies, which affects our ability to migrate to Windows eleven due to security concerns."
"I don't like the UI of the Camunda Platform, I have found the Signavio solution to be much better for me to create the process designs and execute them. Additionally, I have found the tools in the Camunda Platform are not compatible with some of my other tools. They should improve this in the future."
"It would be better if the tool were made less reliant on Java."
"There should be a multi-tenant solution for the platform where it supports multiple organizations on one platform instead of having to spin up multiple clusters for each organization. There should be an easy way to integrate different departments into one platform without having to operate multiple platforms. The operations should be easier with the enterprise solution. It should not create more overhead for the operations people."
"I would also like a very easy to use form builder."
"Initially, installation was challenging, but recent improvements have made it much easier."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"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

"Time and monetary savings can range from 20 to 90 percent."
"I am not sure about the costs, but two Bot Runners and four Bot Creators may cost approximately 1CR."
"Yearly, our licensing costs are about $90,000 to $100,000. There will be additional licensing costs when we add more Bot Runners to our infrastructure."
"Additional costs will be for the machines and the number of machines that you are using. You can deploy virtually as well as on physical machines. In both the situations, you do need to allocate a certain budget for securing the machines and where the software will be installed and running. The machines cannot be used for anything else, because only a certain bot can run at a certain time. You need to be very particular about your scheduling of running the bots, and while the bot is running nobody can use the machine. You cannot have an agent working on a machine and the bot running in the background. It has to be completely dedicated. Then there are the network bandwidth requirements and space requirements, which are additional costs apart from the licensing and software costs. The developer is also going to charge you for their coding time too."
"Licensing for Automation Anywhere (AA) is paid on a yearly basis. Out of all the RPA tools, it has the most value for money, e.g. what you pay is what you get."
"We have a three-year contract with Automation Anywhere."
"I would rate the cost of Automation Anywhere as a six out of ten, with ten being the most expensive."
"We have saved customers 400% in terms of time saved by implementing this product."
"Its price is decent. Everything is included in the license. The Community version is also good to start with. We are using the Community version."
"The evaluation of my customers on pricing is that it is reasonable."
"The cost of this solution is better than some competing products."
"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."
"Generally, the price could be better, as well as the licensing fees."
"Compared to other software, Camunda Platform is quite cost-effective."
"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."
"Licensing costs are anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000 USD per year."
"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.