We performed a comparison between Camunda and SAP Signavio Process Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The UI is very user-friendly compared to other products. The native, vanilla UI is very interesting and intuitive to use. It's user-friendly when it comes to modernizing a business process."
", Camunda can be a powerful tool to work with when used in an optimized and well-implemented manner."
"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."
"The most valuable features are the workflow, the task list, and the modeler where we use VPN."
"It is simple to use. The user experience is very good."
"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."
"The integration with almost any language, product, and even human tasks, is valuable. It's very seamless to integrate into existing systems. It doesn't require you to rewrite a lot of your existing system. That's where it really stands out."
"The most valuable feature of SAP Signavio Process Manager is the ability to do business process models."
"It is a scalable solution."
"We can use workflow manager to create forms."
"The product's most valuable feature is the transformation process."
"I really like the Collaboration Hub because it's so easy to communicate. And what is really important is that you can use it asynchronously. It doesn't matter if you're working in Italy or in America. You are using the same process and you can speak about the same process."
"It is a stable solution."
"When comparing my experience with Celonis and Signavio, I can discern the distinctions between these two platforms. However, I'm unable to differentiate between ARAs and add-ons, as that falls outside my scope of familiarity. Regarding Celonis, it comes with its set of advantages and disadvantages. Notably, it boasts robust features like action flows, task mining, and seamless integration with AML programming. Conversely, Signavio lacks action flows and instead relies on action segments and tasks for interaction. This discrepancy is a significant factor setting Selenium and SecureView apart. In the context of Signavio, it offers a combination of BPMN and process discovery, a feature absent in Celonis. This tandem of BPMN and process insight contributes to Signavio’S potency. Meanwhile, Celonis primarily features the process miner tool, setting it apart from Signavio. These variations collectively outline the numerous differences existing between Celonis and Signavio."
"It is highly user-friendly and easy to use, even for those who are not familiar with product modeling."
"The primary issue regarding the Camuto platform is its high cost of training. This is why I haven't discussed it extensively, as compared to other products that are more affordable in terms of developer training."
"It lacks some preset features and configurations which would make it more plug-and-play for customers."
"The documentation could use improvement."
"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."
"Initial setup can be quite complex."
"The business model could be easier to understand."
"I think that Camunda can try to do better when it comes to solving the complexities of all the products in its software stack."
"Community support is basically what I'm looking for. Other than that, it is okay for now."
"The price can be made cheaper."
"Its reporting feature could have customization options."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting function. At the moment, for example, while it is possible to report on how many users you had in the last month, you can't use it to tell you how many users you had from the first week to the second week. This is really a drawback because when you have an activity to promote Signavio or BPI, it would be good to be able to measure how many people you had in the system."
"It would be beneficial to have a defined leveling or hierarchy system to facilitate better understanding and analysis. More openness and flexibility would enhance its capabilities."
"There are a lot of challenges with Process Manager. For example, we wanted to create a process map from an Excel sheet, but Signavio doesn't have that capability. I have raised this issue with Signavio support, but it is one of the bottlenecks we are currently facing."
"Two executives cannot work on one modeling process simultaneously."
"The tool's navigation could be improved."
"SAP Signavio Process Manager's UI is not user-friendly. Its pricing is also high."
Camunda enables organizations to orchestrate processes across people, systems, and devices to continuously overcome complexity and increase efficiency. With Camunda, business users and developers collaborate using BPMN to model end-to-end processes and run sophisticated automation with the speed, scale, and resilience required to stay competitive. Hundreds of enterprises such as Atlassian, ING, and Vodafone design, orchestrate and improve business-critical processes with Camunda to accelerate digital transformation.
The Signavio portfolio of web-based business transformation solutions helps companies to understand and optimize all of their business processes quickly and at scale, providing instant insights for informed decision-making. Signavio’s intuitive analysis, change management and execution solutions around process excellence include use cases like digital transformation, operational excellence and customer-centricity, placing them at the heart of global organizations.
Over 1 million users in more than 1,500 organizations worldwide rely on Signavio products to make processes part of their company’s DNA. Headquartered in Berlin, Germany, Signavio was founded in 2009 to address the need for a collaborative approach to process management.
Signavio was acquired by SAP in the first quarter of 2021. For more information, visit www.signavio.com
Camunda is ranked 2nd in Business Process Design with 24 reviews while SAP Signavio Process Manager is ranked 6th in Business Process Design with 10 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.4, while SAP Signavio Process Manager is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Signavio Process Manager writes "Gives us a single source of truth, making it easier to find and fix operational problems". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Pega BPM, Bizagi, Appian and ServiceNow Orchestration, whereas SAP Signavio Process Manager is most compared with Celonis, ARIS BPA, Visio, ADONIS and UiPath Process Mining. See our Camunda vs. SAP Signavio Process Manager report.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.