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

Celonis vs FortressIQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 2024

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

Celonis
Ranking in Process Mining
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
AI Data Analysis (7th)
FortressIQ
Ranking in Process Mining
13th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Process Mining category, the mindshare of Celonis is 16.9%, down from 18.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of FortressIQ is 1.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Mining Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Celonis16.9%
FortressIQ1.8%
Other81.3%
Process Mining
 

Featured Reviews

PB
Senior Business Intelligence Analyst at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Process mining has transformed invoice prioritization and reduced duplicates across finance workflows
One of the valuable features is Action Flow. Another feature I appreciate is the Simulation Report that Celonis provides, which allows me to identify and predict future analysis. Celonis has also moved into Views, which is very interactive for business users, and these are the features I appreciate the most. With Action Flow, I addressed an issue where vendors were not receiving real-time status updates on their invoices. I created an Action Flow that provides vendors with real-time status information on their current invoices sent to our company. After implementing this Action Flow, our normal ServiceNow ticketing has been reduced by 70 percent, and vendors are utilizing the Action Flow extensively. Regarding the Simulation Report, I used it to show the business what would happen if we changed some automation rates in the process, added more FTEs, or removed FTEs. I demonstrated to the business that if they changed these parameters by a certain number, they would see projected outcomes. Through this simulation, we identified that our cycle time was reduced by two days in one of the AR processes. Additionally, our invoices became prioritized, and the number of duplicate invoices was drastically reduced because we check for duplicates before posting and remove any duplicates. There have been many other savings, including P&L savings and cost reductions during the implementation of Celonis use cases.
Sean Ammon - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at CIBA
The product has good process mining capabilities, but it is very expensive
We are one of the three organizations across Europe and Africa that are certified implementers of FortressIQ. People who would like to use the solution must choose the right partner to implement. Some tweaking still needs to happen around the commercial model and the pricing structures. Even though the product is good, it's very difficult for customers to pay for it. It defeats the purpose if we have a good product but no one can afford to pay for it. Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the spaghetti it throws off when configuring the sequence of processes and tracking the endpoint. I also like the variation from these defined processes and what is being observed on the ground. I'm exploring the root cause analysis a lot these days, and it seems to be quite interesting. But again, there are a lot of external dependencies on that. But I think the spaghetti, and the one that shows the variation and the performance gap, is something which I really like."
"From a features perspective, the discovery and analytics parts of Celonis have been valuable, especially the analytics and all of the out-of-the-box process connectors."
"Cause analyzer is a very good feature."
"It provides seamless unified views with awesome drill down options."
"The solution offers very good division management."
"In my Celonis experience, it is easy to use and has higher AI capabilities."
"The product helps clients visualize potential savings by minimizing human errors and reducing manual work."
"The solution offers a very good user interface."
"The support is responsive and reliable."
"The process mining capability of the solution is valuable."
 

Cons

"The technical support is very bad."
"It should be more flexible. It is not particularly flexible in the way it works, and it is quite rigid. It has some very strong structures that you have to follow. It could certainly be made more user-friendly to understand and should have fewer requirements for manipulation of the data to create the visualizations. We should also get better support from Celonis, and they also need to make the licensing model slightly different."
"The UI could be improved."
"Celonis needs to improve the feature channel. They should incorporate more generative AI elements into their solution."
"The process analytics could be a bit easier."
"Celonis needs to improve the feature channel."
"I have experienced lags in response times from customer service. We are not always receiving responses on time."
"The pricing policy is not affordable in Ukraine."
"Another aspect that needs improvement is the domain definition."
"The way the commercial model of the product is structured must be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Evaluating the price of the solution can be a difficult question. It is all about the business case and the return of the investments. That is typically how we also see this type of solution. It depends very much on the return. The entry-level is focused on enterprise size companies, for the SMB segment is it is out of their range. It is definitely expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is based on APC. It charges you based on the amount of GV that you use."
"The solution’s pricing is high when compared to other process mining tools."
"Though Celonis is a bit pricey, it is worth it."
"It is only affordable for large or public companies."
"Celonis is a little more expensive than UiPath."
"Celonis has the highest pricing in the process mining domain."
"Once we try to scale it up, the product becomes expensive."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The pricing is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Mining solutions are best for your needs.
879,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise40
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Signavio Process Manager or Celonis?
SAP Signavio Process Manager is a very robust industrial-grade business process modeling tool. It is easy to use and does not require too much technological involvement. This solution has a collabo...
What do you like most about Celonis?
Celonis, especially for high-risk finance-related processes, helped us make precise decisions and uncover hidden values within our architecture. It was one of the most significant values our busine...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Celonis?
Based on client feedback, I have heard that the pricing for Celonis is considered high. However, as a developer, I am not directly involved in the pricing aspect.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Anheuser-Busch InBev, AXA, Bayer, Cisco, Deloitte, Deutsche Telekom, Hitachi, Kellogg's, Lufthansa, and Whirlpool
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Celonis vs. FortressIQ and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.