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

CMW Tracker vs SoftExpert BPM comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

CMW Tracker
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
28th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (31st)
SoftExpert BPM
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
48th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of CMW Tracker is 1.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SoftExpert BPM is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CMW Tracker1.6%
SoftExpert BPM0.7%
Other97.7%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Excellent task manager software - supports both management and workflow
Excellent task manager software - supports both management and workflow. Time tracking is available and much used in our firm. Integration with Microsoft Outlook is also a great feature, along with the ability to access from mobile. Being able to use Comindware Tracker for common processes or standalone tasks for crucial in our decision to test the software. The software is flexible and computer-novice friendly, making training required minimal and efficient to implement.
Andrea González - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Consultant at ITIS
Quick deployment, high availability, and easy to use
We are using SoftExpert BPM for document management, workflow, and forms The solution has helped us have access to documents and processes, such as analytics and forms. The most valuable feature of SoftExpert BPM is its ease of use. The form in SoftExpert BPM should improve. I have been using…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This software added transparency to our workflows. It helped with increasing throughput of clients and their satisfaction."
"It helps very well with project management, and the workflow process is very easy and fast."
"The workflow tracker helps us to track our staff's workflow. It helps us to improve the productivity of our team."
"Our purchasing team's efficiency and the productivity of our operations team have improved since implementing this solution."
"It successfully routes hand-offs between different teams, adds transparency to workflows, and has a set of social collaboration tools."
"Comindware Tracker features a clear layout with a clean, professional interface that people can use with ease."
"Comindware is great for workflow management; it's user-friendly and trustworthy, and you don't need technical skills to develop, maintain, and update workflows using the intuitive web-based visual workflow builder."
"This solution can be useful for tracking the different stages of projects and the people working on them."
"The most valuable feature of SoftExpert BPM is its ease of use."
"We promote the use of this product because it's integrated and has a very nicely designed program, simplifying our workflow and the workflow of our clients, which saves time and money for everyone while making us more productive."
"A complete project management suite in one integrated package."
 

Cons

"This solution lacks API integration with some popular websites."
"However, if you have a not so common issue, it might take time to get a final solution."
"The initial setup can be quite slow and finicky."
"If your organization has only a few team members then this tool is not suitable."
"It would be wonderful to have newer version releases more frequently, but it is quite a minor con."
"There are not very many report templates, and if there were more, it would really help."
"The UX/UI could be reviewed and revamped to meet new the criteria of Digitalization and Innovation."
"The OpenAPI is good, but it is not enough. It lacks out-of-box integrations with popular web services."
"The form in SoftExpert BPM should improve."
"It could do more to use all the data it collects to intelligently manage the user experience."
"I would like for them to incorporate artificial intelligence and be more intuitive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is so reasonable."
"This solution has a very lost cost."
"Great value for the money."
"Setup cost is reasonable and average on the market. They offer simple licensing and price per user."
"I benefit from this software by getting a variety of reporting options and features for a relatively low cost"
"The pricing and licensing is as per market standards, except that the process of extending licenses is also easy."
"Price per user works for me when they do not count my clients, which fill forms."
"The price of SoftExpert BPM is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
21%
Outsourcing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise3
No data available
 

Also Known As

Comindware Tracker
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Anthem, Hertz, Aetna, CVS Pharmacy, Covidien, Quicken Loans, Associated British Ports, United Card Services
Coca Cola, CRODA, CSN, Abril, Midea Carrier
Find out what your peers are saying about CMW Tracker vs. SoftExpert BPM and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.