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

HCL Domino vs Unqork comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.0
HCL Domino provides ROI for some users, while others struggle; it's praised for reducing paperwork and increasing satisfaction.
Sentiment score
8.3
Unqork offers cost-effective, efficient application development with 20-30% workload reduction, yielding positive feedback and favorable ROI.
The platform provides default workspaces, and managing or increasing space is easier compared to other platforms.
Using Unqork has resulted in improved cost-saving, time-saving, and resource-saving benefits for our projects.
Two to three projects saw a twenty to thirty percent reduction in workload, indicating a profitable pricing structure.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
HCL Domino's technical support is positively received, while customer service experiences mixed reviews due to variable interaction quality.
Sentiment score
7.5
Unqork's customer service is reliable and responsive, with fast resolutions but occasional inconsistency in support quality.
I rate their technical support as excellent.
The Unqork community portal and academy provide extensive information, with 60 to 70% of required information readily available.
The Unqork community helped integrate features like colored status indicators using JavaScript.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
HCL Domino is praised for scalability but faces challenges with large databases, varying by company size and usage.
Sentiment score
7.0
Unqork is scalable and adaptable, but faces challenges with large data volumes and high-traffic systems, averaging six to eight ratings.
Its cloud infrastructure simplifies global access to data and services without the fear of losing data.
Scalability features like UI and APIs are all available within the same platform, making it easy to handle increased demands.
Not every project can be executed through Unqork as some complex requirements might need proof of concept before proceeding.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
HCL Domino is praised for its stability and reliability, despite minor concerns and differing opinions on larger databases.
Sentiment score
6.7
Unqork is stable and reliable, though complex projects may face occasional issues, with outcomes improving through proper usage.
A component's previously set value might be missing the next day, affecting reliability.
The main issue I have with Unqork is the limited availability of learning resources.
There have been no significant stability issues where the entire platform went down.
 

Room For Improvement

HCL Domino needs modern updates for UI, performance, integration, security, user-friendliness, scalability, and cloud migration capabilities.
Unqork users seek improved UI, mobile support, learning resources, platform interoperability, and enhanced grid, analytics, and collaboration features.
In-line editing of documents and a document viewer are functionalities that would be beneficial.
Unqork moved from the Sanctuary to Vega platform without providing a migration tool, necessitating manual updates.
The setup for API calls was initially challenging, especially when dealing with service logs and transforming large JSON codes for validation and PDF generation.
It would be beneficial if they further improved compatibility with both the previous Sencha compiler and the new Vega compiler.
 

Setup Cost

HCL Domino's pricing is high, especially compared to competitors, and can vary based on user count and needs.
Enterprise users have mixed opinions on Unqork's cost-effectiveness, with pricing variably perceived as affordable or expensive compared to competitors.
The Notes client is very expensive, costing around $105 per client.
The certification costs are particularly high, around 16,000 Indian Rupees.
The certification costs around $2000, which is ten times the price of UiPath.
In my experience, it seemed somewhat underpriced, possibly due to being an early adopter.
 

Valuable Features

HCL Domino integrates messaging and applications with robust security, cross-platform support, low-code development, and flexible architecture for efficiency.
Unqork provides a no-code platform enabling fast app development with enterprise integrations, AI, and advanced UI components.
Its hybrid nature allows the use of both web-based applications and Notes client-based applications.
It streamlines operations by automating the process across various departments, allowing cash requests to be raised, reviewed, and approved more efficiently.
Performance-wise, Unqork facilitates connecting and configuring systems synchronously and efficiently.
Unqork allows me to write HTML code, use JavaScript, Angular, and React, which significantly enhances its flexibility.
 

Categories and Ranking

HCL Domino
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Unqork
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Rapid Application Development Software category, the mindshare of HCL Domino is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Unqork is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Rapid Application Development Software
 

Featured Reviews

FrederickLim - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides mobile email systems with solid stability and easy deployment
The initial setup is easy. You need to sign up. It depends on the scope. It will take longer if there are more than one or more applications. The project usually includes infrastructure and deployment may take anywhere from one month to six months. I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.
Rajeev Lochan - PeerSpot reviewer
Great UI and out-of-the-box integrations, but needs expanded cloud platform support
Given the rapid pace of innovation we’ve already seen from Unqork, there are a few major capability gaps we face currently. However, some areas of improvement and features we would benefit from in upcoming releases include: 1. Enhanced accessibility compliance - While meeting baseline standards, further WCAG conformance and widgets optimized for screen readers could expand access for disabled users of Unqork solutions. Added compliance certifications would also be welcomed. 2. Expanded cloud platform support - The addition of Azure and Google Cloud alongside AWS would allow our deployment options to better align with enterprise strategic cloud choices outside just Amazon. 3. More analytics and observability - Increased telemetry on app performance, component reuse rates, load testing etc. would help fine-tune Unqork solutions. More data and dashboard visibility into adoption would optimize our ROI. 4. Managing technical debt - As portfolios of Unqork apps grow over time, best practices and features to facilitate updating legacy components, refactoring old solutions, and preventing erosion will be helpful. Added controls to manage technical debt long-term. 5. Evolution of existing components - Existing rich widgets and connectors rounding out maturity with incremental capabilities would expand Unqork's versatility. Expanding the range of use cases served by current components. 6. Offline functionality - For mobile solutions, some limited persistent caching and offline usability during intermittent connectivity would better support field agents/inspectors. Tolerating offline states is key. 7. Design version control - Advancing visual version control capabilities for better design history, branching, merging, and reverting changes to Unqork sites would improve collaboration and prevent overwrite errors by nontechnical users.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
39%
Insurance Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about HCL Domino?
The most valuable features of the solution are security and integration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HCL Domino?
The Notes client is very expensive, costing around $105 per client. Overall, HCL Domino is a costly product.
What needs improvement with HCL Domino?
The speed of the Notes client is an area that could be improved. Many people are not very happy with its speed. Additionally, in-line editing of documents and a document viewer are functionalities ...
What do you like most about Unqork?
Unqork UI behaves consistently across devices and seamlessly adapts to various form factors.
What needs improvement with Unqork?
The areas of Unqork that need improvement include the UI, as data-driven applications in banks require displaying data effectively on forms and dashboards. When working with JPMorgan, the data stru...
What is your primary use case for Unqork?
I mostly work with Unqork to develop internal applications, and right now, I'm working with JPMorgan in a department called Asset Wealth Management. We try to automate processes that were previousl...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

IBM Lotus Domino, Lotus Domino
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

A1 Telekom, Acubiz, Afrisam, E. A. Juffali & Brothers, Fiducia & GAD, and Pakistan State Oil
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL Domino vs. Unqork and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.