We performed a comparison between Fortra's Automate and HyperScience based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The licensing of the product is very good. You only need to license it once and then you have it forever."
"I actually quite liked the no-coding functionality."
"Fortra's Automate performs the job effectively and has the capability to alert us of any issues."
"The ability to connect to websites and pull data is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The interface is simple, user-friendly, and very intuitive."
"This product is quite easy to install, learn, and use, with our new employees being able to start using it in projects for clients after only two weeks of internal training."
"We use it for specific cases, mainly secure file transfers, which are vital for us. And it works for us."
"I like the interface; it makes managing automation easy. We can set different schedules and templates for each task."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"The documentation is not that great."
"Error messages should be better. For error status, there should be better documentation because a lot of times, error messages that you get are quite vague. For example, you get a message saying that the workflow has run into an unknown status, which is vague. It just tells you that it failed, but you don't know how or why it failed. It makes debugging difficult."
"I would like to see some better web automation, a wizard like the one in the product WinAutomation would be very nice."
"Some companies have asked for voice integration. This is likely part of the roadmap."
"The solution has a very weak knowledge base."
"We really need a free development environment for customers. Building and testing automation on production isn't ideal."
"The OCR for Hebrew text needs to be improved."
"It would be an improvement if Automate had better stability tools, whether by recommending a certain amount of memory because it can be a memory hog at times."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
Fortra's Automate is ranked 5th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 21 reviews while HyperScience is ranked 6th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews. Fortra's Automate is rated 8.2, while HyperScience is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Fortra's Automate writes "Can automate several processes with only one bot and is easy to implement, administer, and use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". Fortra's Automate is most compared with Microsoft Power Automate, UiPath, MOVEit, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Automation Anywhere (AA), whereas HyperScience is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, UiPath, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate and Tungsten RPA. See our Fortra's Automate vs. HyperScience report.
See our list of best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) 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.
