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

IBM BPM vs IBM WebSphere Application Server comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 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

IBM BPM
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
111
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (7th), Process Automation (5th)
IBM WebSphere Application S...
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of IBM BPM is 3.4%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM WebSphere Application Server is 11.8%, up from 10.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

Prince Mathew - PeerSpot reviewer
More customizable than IBM FileNet and useful for automation
One suggestion for IBM BPM is to provide better integration between their products, such as DataCap, which we use for scanning. Although the new CP4BA offers offline capabilities, not everyone is on CP4BA, so enhanced integration for those on older versions would be beneficial. Another major suggestion is to offer a migration path when a product reaches its end of life. For example, there was no migration path when we moved, so we had to redo everything we had developed over ten years completely.
BharathirajaSukumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient load balancing and the clustering, achieved by using the deployment manager, is valuable
I believe that the system is already good. However, for improvement or enhancement, it is user-friendly, but it could offer better choices on the front end for different aspects or options. Sometimes, I have to search extensively for features, as there are no upfront tabs. There is a lack of visible, easy, user-friendly, and straightforward options for the number of features.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features come in the bundle, the design process, creating services, creating BPDs, creating coaches, and UI/UX."
"The designer feature, compared to other solutions is easy to use."
"One thing that I love about them is that they make it easier to integrate with other systems, especially with the use of smaller files."
"It is transparent to business users because it is mostly picture based modelling."
"The Process Designer is good. We like how we can drag and drop and link the processes up, that works out great for us."
"This solution is very stable."
"Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly."
"The solution is more customizable than IBM FileNet."
"We needed this type of integration and WebShepere is the best tool for it."
"This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is the best in terms of scalability and performance, as well as the support for managing distributed transactions."
"Without the Admin Console it would be very hard to configure JVM settings, JDBC datasources, mail session settings, and security providers."
"Security: It is compatible with the latest Java 8 security features, supports FIPS 140-2 and NIST SP 800-53 with strong ciphers and cryptography keys, and supports TLS 1.2 completely. Also, configuring client and server certificates is relatively easy."
"IBM WAS is the backbone for our enterprise content management suite which delivers the primary processes for our customers. Without a good application server, it would be hard to provide a secure layer of midddleware upon which the other applications run. IBM WAS improves the stability of the entire solution and provides a high quality platform for running web-based solutions."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is easy to use."
"Ease of administration: It has an Integrated Solutions Console, what we call the administrative console, with very detailed configurations and Help pages for each configurable item."
 

Cons

"The initial setup process is complex for basic users."
"The stability varies because it involves a lot of other components like databases, so sometimes if something goes wrong there, it can't recover from the fatal errors."
"Integration with web services, especially in the standard version of the product."
"Could increase vulnerability and security patches to make it more robust."
"I see room for improvement in terms of the overall experience."
"The debugging needs improvement. There is some confusion surrounding the debugging."
"I would like IBM to consider including AI-enabled process mining, robotic process automation, and very good OCR capabilities from the computer vision side."
"There are a few areas, like triggering mechanisms, externally exposed variables, and changing its values."
"WebSphere Application Server doesn't have an automated deployment option, forcing us to use third-party tools like Jenkins UCD and Palo Automated Deployment."
"IBM needs to pay attention to market changes more quickly. We now have Java 9 and very soon Java EE8. We do not want to wait for two or three years after their release until they are supported by the new version."
"The footprint could be reduced so that we can use a smaller virtual machine to run the application. We could also use more scripts. I would like this solution to be more script oriented, rather than GUI oriented."
"When we run into memory or locking issues, we resort to using third-party tools. However, it would be preferable to have native tools for debugging this type of problem."
"WebSphere is very cumbersome and not user-friendly."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for the Arabic language."
"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"The licensing could be improved, and I would like it to give the longevity of the lifespan of the visions. In the next release, I would like to be able to download and extract the files so that I can just use my application server."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM BPM is expensive, so most large companies opt for IBM based on their licensing options."
"The solution is highly-priced."
"The solution is expensive since it is an enterprise application."
"It has a low cost to implement. You'll get your money back in the same year that you complete the project."
"The cloud and license of the subscription model for IBM BPM can be complex. There are a lot of alternatives to choose from."
"I give the pricing an eight out of ten."
"We have a yearly licensing model. It is not expensive. There are no addition costs to the standard license."
"I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
"There is an Eclipse Plugin provided by IBM, so no need to buy IBM Rational Application Developer or Rational Software Architect tools."
"I don't remember the price, but there are no additional costs."
"The licensing cost is 1,000 of euros for a 30-year table."
"The licensing policy is based on the PVU base."
"It's expensive."
"We pay around $200,000 annually."
"WebSphere Application Server is expensive, so it may not be a good option for small companies."
"My company is on a perpetual or permanent license agreement with IBM WebSphere Application Server. There's also a pay-per-use option, but customers rarely choose that option. Most of the customers are on the perpetual license deal that's all-inclusive. As the license cost is quite expensive, I'm rating it two out of five."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
13%
Insurance Company
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better, IBM BPM or IBM Business Automation Workflow?
We researched both IBM solutions and in the end, we chose Business Automation Workflow. IBM BPM has a good user interface and the BPM coach is a helpful tool. The API is very useful in providing en...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM BPM?
Once it is installed, maintaining it is not a big issue.
What do you like most about IBM WebSphere Application Server?
Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Application Server?
In Korea, when you buy IBM iOS, the WebSphere base version is included with iOS. That means no additional cost.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Application Server?
I find the server okay, however, using the Maker instance, the Moving instance, and the Change instance is a little bit complicated without WebSphere knowledge.
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Lombardi Edition, IBM Business Process Manager, IBM WebSphere Process Server
WebSphere Application Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Barclays, EmeriCon, Banca Popolare di Milano, CST Consulting, KeyBank, KPMG, Prolifics, Sandhata Technologies Ltd., State of Alaska, Humana S.A., Saperion, esciris, Banco Espirito Santo
TalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal League
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.