Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Camunda vs Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

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

Camunda
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (1st), Process Automation (1st)
Interfacing Technologies En...
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
34th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools (29th), GRC (22nd), Quality Management Software (40th), Document Management Software (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Camunda is 16.5%, down from 21.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Camunda16.5%
Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center0.3%
Other83.2%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

FABIO NAGAO - PeerSpot reviewer
Reduces costs with hardware abstraction and simplifies scaling
There is an issue where, in some situations, I need to scale up by observing both CPU and memory usage of containers, yet under the current options available at Amazon, this is not possible. I have to choose between monitoring CPU or memory to scale my solution. Not every software is built for deployment as a container service, although the current architecture trend is changing this.
SantoshKulkarni1 - PeerSpot reviewer
A Robust Solution with Enhanced Automation and Process Improvement Identification Capabilities
I recommend that users invest more time in the initial setup of the process architecture within the tool. It is crucial to spend time designing how the process architecture works as it significantly impacts how the tool behaves. This upfront investment can prevent the need for extensive reworking later on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"The solution is useful for small projects."
"On a scale of one to ten, I rate ECS a ten out of ten."
"It is a scalable product. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten."
"We can share, discuss, and develop the model together — from a distance. It's really helped us during these times of isolation."
"The headless nature of the Camunda Platform is something that has helped us to build our own logic and platforms on it."
"We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we are sharing it with our business users."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share the logic within the rules engine with the business, so you can put it up for everybody to read."
"One notable software-related benefit from a user perspective is our improved ability to identify opportunities for automation and process enhancement just by gaining a clearer view of the processes. There are two valuable aspects. First, setting up the process architecture is commendable. Second, not having to maintain different versions of processes is a notable benefit. The solution is stable. The support team is responsive."
"The most valuable feature is the integrated manner in which all the capabilities of the Enterprise Process Center platform work together and make it easier to complete the documentation of processes."
 

Cons

"Customization and tech stack could be up-to-date."
"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."
"In the latest version, there are certain workflow nodes that are missing. Camunda should bring those back, or rather, develop them quickly."
"It has a Postgres database at the backend, and it is very difficult to scale if you increase the number of processes running. We did hit some barriers. We were able to overcome them, but it was a problem. Camunda has another product called Camunda Cloud, which supposedly doesn't have the same scalability problems, but we are not using Camunda Cloud because the set of features is smaller than Camunda On-Premises. So, its scalability can be improved. Because it has a single database, it is more difficult to scale if you have a huge success."
"We have to wait to see if Bonita provided us with some features that Camunda does not or if we experience any stability issues."
"It is not difficult to change existing processes. The difficulty was in integration, for example, to call an external web API, and in the security capabilities, to use a vault for secrets. That was difficult."
"The support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"As with all such platforms, Enterprise Process Center is a complex tool and there are many capabilities and features that take time to learn."
"However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights into process functionality. Additionally, there's always room for enhancement in the user interface."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have an annual subscription to this solution."
"We're using the free version. We used the Enterprise version for some time. If I compare free versus what we paid at that time, the Enterprise version costs a lot. For the additional functionality that we got with the Enterprise version, it was too costly."
"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."
"When compared with the proprietary products, the pricing costs are much less, even though it is an enterprise edition."
"We are using the paid edition because there is no separate support and service license yet. We are yet to find a suitable licensing model for Camunda because we only use the engine, and we have implemented our solution around Camunda Cloud. So, we are mainly interested in the support and service, and that's what we mainly use in the paid edition."
"The cost of this solution is better than some competing products."
"It is good for a startup. When we started, its price was fair, but the way we are using it to orchestrate microservices makes it expensive. When you are growing as a company, you would have more microservices, and you would have more users. There is an exponential effect when you are growing in terms of the number of conditions, processes, and users because they bill you per process. So, the price was increasing very quickly for us, and it was very difficult."
"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."
"My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to understand what options you believe you are going to want to implement and rollout in the first three to five years, but spend the most time understanding what the set-up costs and pricing will be in the first two or maybe three."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
6%
Insurance Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise29
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 Bonita, you can build the entire mechanism using the GUI, it’s that simple. You c...
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 easy plug-and-play options. The initial setup was seamless and very easy to imp...
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 option was a big win for us and allows for the integration of microservices very...
What do you like most about Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
One notable software-related benefit from a user perspective is our improved ability to identify opportunities for automation and process enhancement just by gaining a clearer view of the processe...
What needs improvement with Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
While we have yet to explore the tool's capabilities fully, I can't think of any immediate drawbacks. However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights ...
What is your primary use case for Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
We use the solution for finance processes, specifically for accounts payable and accounts receivable.
 

Also Known As

Camunda BPM
Enterprise Process Center
 

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

24 Hour Fitness, Accruent, AT&T Inc., Atlassian, CSS Insurance, Deutsche Telekom, Generali, Provinzial NordWest Insurance Services, Swisscom AG, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VHV Group, Zalando
Pepsi-Cola Manufacturing International Ltd., Pfizer Deutschland GmbH, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Bayer S.p.A., KPMG, Royal Australian Air, Orange
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda vs. Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.