We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and SnapLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have automated processes with IBM BPM and DocuSign. Its valuable features include low-code, timer, etc. It makes it simple to implement the products. We generate reports using the solution."
"Good user interface and good add option."
"The system integration layer is valuable because this enables an organization to create a single point where all the key organizational master data is held in different IT applications across different functions, that can be accessed and updated."
"Automation is the most valuable feature of IBM BPM."
"Previously, our company's business automation process was slow. IBM BPM's schedule and response functionalities are excellent...There are countless use cases in which IBM BPM proves to be a valuable tool for my clients."
"We made the transformation to agile. Altogether with BPM, it is the total package."
"This product does the job in terms of executing the workflow."
"This solution has streamlined our operation and improved the TAT of sales, operations, and underwriters."
"SnapLogice is a low-code development tool."
"It's more developer-friendly, and development can be done at a faster phase."
"SnapLogic is a great platform for establishing integrations among various systems or patterns by using any kind of interface. If something is not supported by predefined snaps – snaps are connectors in SnapLogic – you can create them (custom snaps) or write a script."
"I found SnapLogic valuable and what I found most valuable about it was its ETL feature. I also found its automation feature valuable. It can be used for automating manual activities. It can be used as a middleware for certain transactional data processing and minimal datasets and ETL activities."
"The feature I found most valuable in SnapLogic is low-code development. Low-code development has been very useful for simple processes, which is required for business users such as extracting details from a file or getting things reported by calling your web service. Calling your web service also becomes easier with SnapLogic because of the snaps available, so if you have the documentation, you can call an API. You don't have to write all those clients to call an API, so that is another feature I found very easy in SnapLogic. Configuring and managing all the file systems also become very handy with the solution."
"The connection with SOAP is the best feature."
"You can use other languages, such as Python, and easily connect to other systems."
"The product is easy to use and has many connectivity options."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"The integration could be improved."
"I have an interest around the robotic piece, and integrating that with the processes. I think that is certainly a good direction to be going."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"One of the things that we are looking at is cognitive learning. IBM has another product called IBM RPA, I think, which is doing some of that stuff. We would like to see more of that with respect to cognitive learning and AI put back into the process engine to help."
"The initial setup was complex. It is not always easy to launch a new platform and it needed better coordination with IBM."
"We have had to use Mule as an alternative integration tool because it is more flexible than IBM BPM."
"Finding errors and bugs on the system is not easy. We can't seem to use the events or logs to find them, so it makes it difficult to debug the system. They really need to work on their debugging features to make is much, much easier. It would improve the solution considerably and should be something they add in a future release."
"It needs some more snaps. I would like to see some of the features be changed in some of the snaps."
"One of the areas for improvement in SnapLogic is that the connectors for some of the applications should be more available in terms of testing in the dev environment. Another area for improvement is that the logging should be standardized, for example, the integration with an ELK stack should be required out-of-the-box, so you can ship the log and have it in the ELK stack. There should be integration with ELK stack for the log shipping."
"I don't think the support has better knowledge about technologies and tool support. There were lots of times when we had an issue, and it took me quite a long time to explain the problem. I feel like some of the support staff don't know their product well."
"I am looking for more scheduling options. When it comes to scheduling, there are different tools in the market."
"They should expand in terms of features for SaaS-based market requirements in different sectors."
"The support is the most important improvement they could make."
"SnapLogic should have some inbuilt protocol mechanism in order to speed up."
"The dashboards regarding scheduled tasks need further improvement."
IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Process Automation with 105 reviews while SnapLogic is ranked 10th in Process Automation with 20 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while SnapLogic is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SnapLogic writes "Easy to set up, easy to use, and is low-code". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas SnapLogic is most compared with Azure Data Factory, AWS Glue, IBM InfoSphere DataStage, Informatica Cloud Data Integration and SSIS. See our IBM BPM vs. SnapLogic report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.
