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

Celonis vs iGrafx Process360 Live Platform 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
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
AI Data Analysis (8th)
iGrafx Process360 Live Plat...
Ranking in Process Mining
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (19th), Business Process Management (BPM) (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Process Mining category, the mindshare of Celonis is 13.3%, down from 22.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of iGrafx Process360 Live Platform is 2.6%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Mining Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Celonis13.3%
iGrafx Process360 Live Platform2.6%
Other84.1%
Process Mining
 

Featured Reviews

Ebin_Abraham - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Engineer at Baker Hughes
Process mining has delivered major savings and now needs better automation and task mining
Collaboration with ERPs should be improved. Compared to SAP Signavio, Celonis is less competitive for BPMN modeling. Deployment flexibility needs enhancement, as on-premises support is not as strong as SaaS support. The most important area for improvement is the automation part. End-to-end automation capabilities are desired. Currently, workflows are being used, but actions should be able to go via email, task, APIs, and ultimately write back to the source. Adding RPA capability that can interact with required systems and write back to the source would greatly enhance Celonis. Task mining capabilities also require improvement. UiPath Process Mining and Microsoft Process Mining have better task mining capabilities compared to Celonis. Usability and support from Celonis need improvement. They should help clients find more value in the product. Cost is another significant concern, as Celonis is very expensive compared to other process mining tools. The license cost should be reduced. Celonis should establish partnerships with clients to find more use cases and maximize the value gained from Celonis.
MR
Solution Consultant at a healthcare company with 51-200 employees
Provides documentation, process mining, simulation, and automation capabilities
If customers want to change the color or the logo, they have to go through every page to verify everything is right. We have a strategic approach for the customer. I was involved in almost 100 sessions where the customers were looking for a one-time process visualization or one-time process mining, not for a long-term association with this tool. The customer's requirements are more tactical than strategic. We had some challenges during this time frame as I was with iGrafx, and electricity costs rose in Germany. One customer stopped a large deal because they had to reduce every non-invested investment due to the electricity bill rising by 500% to 800%.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cause analyzer is a very good feature."
"The solution offers a very good user interface."
"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."
"Celonis has positively impacted my organization as it holds a Titanium partnership with Celonis."
"Action Flows are good."
"The documentation, multi-hop analysis, and SLA breaches are the most valuable features we have discovered."
"Celonis provides valuable features with in-depth analysis models and UI, and you can make adjustments to the model for production management."
"They have in-built connectors for connecting to various systems."
"It has simplified compliance with regulations and company standards."
"It is very easy to use for describing processes and is very useful in the simulation of the process putting parameters and the metrics process."
"The solution has helped our organization because instead of writing long documentation for the shop floor, flow charts make it more attractive for the staff to follow up on and carry out procedures."
"Simulation is most valuable."
"The solution is very stable."
"This product fulfills ninety percent of our needs, and we're happy as users of it."
"If you need software to help you easily design processes, make simulations, build value stream mappings, which has some LEAN features, and DMAIC support, I strongly encourage you to go forward and buy iGrafx."
"We found the technical support to be helpful."
 

Cons

"The process analytics could be a bit easier."
"The solution can be a bit expensive."
"With every upgrade, the product is completely changed."
"We want to see its linkage to Robotic Process Automation. We would also like to see how can it lead to the implementation side and whether the transition is smooth."
"They need to improve the root cause analysis because they label symptoms as root causes."
"Another area of improvement is implementation. So, in future releases, I would like to see a more streamlined implementation process would be appreciated, making it less time-consuming and more efficient."
"It requires specialized expertise to set it up in the backend. I need knowledgeable data and process people who understand the tool and also my processes."
"Licenses are costly and calculated based on APC and the number of users."
"Dragging and dropping shapes is not as user-friendly as in Visio. In Visio, it's very easy to work with shapes and in very few minutes you can plot a whole, multi swim-lane, cross-functional process."
"With iGrafx, the implementation and the licensing were pretty complex."
"It would be nice to have a Spanish user interface available to us."
"This is a tool that covers the low end (e.g. Visio) to high end (e.g. Aris), although it's much less user friendly."
"Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a reseller in Mexico."
"Visio is more user-friendly."
"I would like to see a lower price, although when used correctly, you can have a good return on your investment."
"The look and feel, along with the ease of use of the solution's web modeling version, is an area with certain shortcomings."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is only affordable for large or public companies."
"The solution’s pricing is based on APC. It charges you based on the amount of GV that you use."
"Celonis is the most expensive solution in the market"
"The solution’s pricing is high when compared to other process mining tools."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"Celonis is a little more expensive than UiPath."
"Celonis has the highest pricing in the process mining domain."
"Pricing-wise, Celonis is a five out of ten right now because my clients just started with the solution. When my clients start looking at scaling Celonis, the cost will grow. Every user has an additional charge, and every gig of data you bring in costs extra."
"Earlier, the licensing part was complex because there were so many modules and elements in the tool. Over the last one and a half years, a lot of work has gone into how the product has priced and positioned its tools in the market."
"I have heard that the solution's pricing is very competitive."
"Our license is a subscription-based model that is per user. The solution is not expensive, I believe a subscription-based model is $10 per user."
"My company is trying to replace iGrafx because the license is a little bit expensive."
"The licensing part is one of the problems. Its licensing depends on the number of users, so it sometimes gets expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Mining solutions are best for your needs.
909,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise46
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Celonis?
I am not heavily involved in that particular aspect, but I have heard that Celonis is somewhat expensive.
What needs improvement with Celonis?
Collaboration with ERPs should be improved. Compared to SAP Signavio, Celonis is less competitive for BPMN modeling. Deployment flexibility needs enhancement, as on-premises support is not as stron...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iGrafx?
I have heard that the solution's pricing is very competitive.
What needs improvement with iGrafx?
If customers want to change the color or the logo, they have to go through every page to verify everything is right. We have a strategic approach for the customer. I was involved in almost 100 sess...
What is your primary use case for iGrafx?
The solution is used for the documentation and visualization of the main processes. The customers have hundreds or thousands of processes, but they start with the top 20 processes. The next step is...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Anheuser-Busch InBev, AXA, Bayer, Cisco, Deloitte, Deutsche Telekom, Hitachi, Kellogg's, Lufthansa, and Whirlpool
Multinational Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Celonis vs. iGrafx Process360 Live Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
909,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.