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

Grooper vs SS&C Blue Prism comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 20, 2025

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

Grooper
Ranking in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP)
28th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SS&C Blue Prism
Ranking in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP)
16th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (21st), Business Process Management (BPM) (34th), Process Automation (26th), Medical Insurance Claims Software (3rd), Insurance Claims Processing (5th), Document Management Software (15th), Low-Code Development Platforms (25th), Loan Management Software (2nd), Document Automation Software (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) category, the mindshare of Grooper is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SS&C Blue Prism is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intelligent Document Processing (IDP)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1552698 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good data ingestion and classification capabilities, supports various media types and formats, and the interface is easy to use
Currently, we're still using version 2-7-2, and now they're about to do the beta release on their version 2021. In this coming version, we expect that some of our issues will be fixed. We've had challenges in classification tasks where similar documents were flagged as multiple matches. The system would identify them and say, "Hey, I think I've got multiple matches. It could either be this one or that one." Because of that, it required us to instruct the system to either leave it unclassified, or we had to halt the process for somebody to look at it. With the new version for 2021, they have changed the paradigm. As it is now, we're using something called a form type, where pages within the document are referenced using a specific page number. For example, in a ten-page document, you might refer to information specifically on the first or fifth page. In the new paradigm, there is a first, middle, and last page concept, as opposed to having the different form types with all of the different pages. What they're telling me is that it's going to make the classification more accurate. Just because the first page of two different documents looks the same, they will not be considered duplicates. Having multiple points of reference will now allow it to better distinguish them. The other area we have had challenges with is table extractions, where if the data headers were not defined, or the tables did not have descriptions for the columns. My understanding is that in the 2021 version, they've now shown that they're handling that. Again, we don't have it and haven't been able to test it, but it's coming. Technical support is definitely an area that they need improvement in, in terms of the front-line individuals.
Gavin Beckett - PeerSpot reviewer
Design studio enables effective automation while licensing needs improvement
I noticed that it lacks the ability to automatically record the process steps like some of its competitors. Having this capability could accelerate the process. The delivery methodology felt somewhat waterfall in style and not sufficiently agile. Additionally, the licensing model was somewhat prohibitive. It was not developed in a consumption-based manner, however, rather in a fixed-price licensing model that did not account for volumes.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The user interface is easy to use, and the flexibility is noteworthy."
"There are many options and customizations that you can make to each individual extractor that allows you to tweak it for exactly what you need."
"Grooper processes difficult sorts of data and unstructured or semi-structured content very well. It's probably one of the better solutions I've seen compared to other solutions I've seen out there. It does a lot more things like segmentation extraction. It does it a lot better. Grooper has more focus on these types of freeform documents where other solutions are very generic and this is a little more elaborate in what they've done. I think they take it to the next level of extracting freeform data."
"Lexicons where the key vocabulary can be inputted it is very helpful."
"I find the design studio, where I can build the automation, and the control room feature, which allows me to run and monitor the automation, to be the most useful."
"Some important features include the language capabilities, which are crucial since RPA has to read the documents provided by the customer."
"The key feature of SS&C that I find valuable is the general workflow visibility."
 

Cons

"They should have more sub-extractors or exclusion extractors so that the user does not have to make a parent data type."
"Technical support is definitely an area that they need improvement in, in terms of the front-line individuals."
"Grooper is new. It's new beta stuff, so we've had some issues, but that's understandable. Getting the beta product to more of a true release is where it needs improvement. I'm going through training now, so it's hard to judge what they have and don't have until I get through that training. Training is the main thing for me because I'm trying to learn and take things I've learned from other products and try to transfer that knowledge to this one."
"If Grooper could "sense" important fields on the document and auto-build extractors for them, that'd be really cool."
"Blue Prism is more costly than UiPath in terms of robotic licenses and orchestrators."
"I noticed that it lacks the ability to automatically record the process steps like some of its competitors."
"There is a need for improved integration with external systems in SS&C."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Overall, their pricing is higher than the competitors, but they offer functionality that is otherwise not available."
"Know how many pages you will be needing to process, as the pricing is based on that."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
17%
Insurance Company
11%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SS&C Blue Prism?
The pricing was not particularly competitive. It wasn't flexible for different geographies. For instance, in Africa, they didn't have a different pricing model to account for affordability. The pri...
What needs improvement with SS&C Blue Prism?
There is a need for improved integration with external systems in SS&C. Currently, integration is limited to web services and K scripts for connecting to third-party systems, which I believe ca...
What is your primary use case for SS&C Blue Prism?
My primary use case for SS&C is managing migration projects. We are currently working on migrating from ViewStation's 3.5 version using K scripts to the new version in SS&C and rebuilding t...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
SS&C AWD
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Oklahoma DOT, Mercy Hospital System, OLERS, Oklahoma State University, Change Healthcare, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, American Airlines Credit Union
AWS, EY, Deloitte, ABBYY, Microsoft, GLYNT.AI, Pfizer, Invesco, Western Union
Find out what your peers are saying about Grooper vs. SS&C Blue Prism and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.