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

IBM Case Foundation vs Studio Creatio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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 Case Foundation
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
32nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Studio Creatio
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (24th), Low-Code Development Platforms (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of IBM Case Foundation is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Studio Creatio is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Nouman Nawaz - PeerSpot reviewer
Mature product in terms of security and stable product
The architecture is a bit difficult, but in BAW, they introduced the Business Automation Workflow. It's a bit easier compared to Case Manager. Currently, we use Case Manager, so it's a bit difficult to upgrade and handle, but BAW is comparatively much better and easier to handle. The limitation is only for customization because IBM doesn't support it. In some scenarios, if you want some business processes to be customized, we have already spoken two or three times with IBM representatives that we have to customize some of the features in this business process. They would say that if you want to do this automation at your own end, then okay, fine, go ahead, but we are not supporting all this customization. The only thing is the customization because it's a complete standard application.
Anatolii Vovniuk - PeerSpot reviewer
Customizable, easy to use, and has good built-in dashboards
The tool is available on the cloud as well as on-premise. The ease of setup depends on the complexity of the project. In most cases, we just connect and work. We must create our own team and find a partner to build our own application. If we need to create something new, it will take time. I rate the ease of setup of the cloud version a ten out of ten. However, I would rate the ease of setup of the on-premise version a five or six out of ten. The on-premise version takes longer to deploy. The cloud version can be deployed within minutes. We receive a license key and start working. If all the components are ready, we can deploy the on-premise version within ten days.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The content management is great."
"Flexible and the ability to divide search screens, and to search for documents. The ECM feature inside the system is great."
"The most valuable features are those involving decision making, analysis, and anything related to event documents because those processes are related to content as well."
"A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting."
"It provides us the capability of producing b​​usiness processes for documents that are launched immediately when a document comes into the repository."
"Case Foundation provides a strong security boost."
"The client and the IBM content navigation are the solution's most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the content manager part of the file as it is very stable, robust, and reliable."
"The most valuable features are performance, built-in variety of multiple task automation, and has international standards notations."
"Creatio also provides us with scalability, performance and agility."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a low-code and no-code platform."
"The low-code tools and business process management that Creatio provides are useful for our internal processes. It is also very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"It enables automating tasks and provides self-service options, ultimately improving efficiency and customer satisfaction."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its CRM functionality and the fact that it is a no-code solution"
"The pre-configured CRM functionalities regarding the accounts management and contact activities is very good. It's easy to develop workflows."
 

Cons

"Once a workflow is launched then it stays static forever, which is a problem because if there is a change in the business then you cannot change the workflow."
"The limitation is only for customization because IBM doesn't support it."
"​The place of improvement is merging or combining all of the workflow functionality into one seamless tool. Now, there are multiple installations that are different. Case Foundation, before you can put Case Manager and you've got IBM BPM, and the roadmap is there to merge them altogether. But that's the struggle at the moment, it's having multiple installations and disparate workflow applications.​"
"There is a need for more open and flexible integration capabilities, allowing seamless collaboration with a broader spectrum of business process management solutions, beyond the confines of IBM's document management offerings."
"There are some features that could be enhanced like the document viewer"
"The service as it currently stands is out-of-date and lacks flexibility."
"90% of the feedback we receive states that the UI is not very user-friendly."
"The cloud version could use more stability."
"The mobile version of the solution could be improved. It's hard to customize it."
"Creatio needs to stabilize their marketplace."
"HRM is an area where Studio Creatio lacks and needs to improve."
"The documentation must be more technical."
"Studio Creatio is a new product in the market, making its lack of maturity an area of concern."
"The solution does not allow extensive customization of the UI. I would like to have much more control over the UI when I build a process. Currently on the UI where the fields are placed and the layout is set in place and you cannot change it. Your experience is going to be the same throughout whatever use case that you are building from customer to customer. You can not have much control over how it looks for each customer. This is an area where they can improve on."
"Numerous options can make implementation confusing."
"They can improve the business rules for defining the type and quantity of the business load. They already seem to be working on this improvement. Integration with the social networks will be very appreciated by the companies. It will be very useful for communication between the company and customers, that is, B to C relationships. Most of the customers or users have smartphones, and they use a lot of social networks. Companies need to stay connected with the customers. They have enabled integration with WhatsApp and Telegram in recent releases, which has been very useful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is not an expensive solution and we are using the standard license."
"IBM Case Foundation is a little expensive."
"The price falls in the middle range—not overly expensive but not extremely affordable either."
"Pricing is in the mid-range, it is not cheap, but it's not expensive."
"I rate the product price a five or six on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"It is fairly competitive."
"The tool is reasonably priced."
"I rate the pricing a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"From my standpoint, it blows out of the water all the other competitors out there that we were potentially looking at, and it was in a reasonable price range, whereas you have these other Fortune 500 companies that were asking for a ridiculous amount."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"The pricing plans are not user-friendly because in many cases you have to buy different options to get additional features."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Insurance Company
12%
Government
10%
University
10%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Case Foundation?
A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Case Foundation?
It was affordable, but right now, ten years later, the cost of the product is extremely high. That's why we are looking for another product.
What needs improvement with IBM Case Foundation?
The architecture is a bit difficult, but in BAW, they introduced the Business Automation Workflow. It's a bit easier compared to Case Manager. Currently, we use Case Manager, so it's a bit difficul...
What do you like most about Studio Creatio?
The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a low-code and no-code platform.
What needs improvement with Studio Creatio?
Sometimes, the cloud version provides slow responses. The documentation must be more technical. Sometimes, we need to work with massive external data. We might have 10 to 20 million lines of data t...
 

Also Known As

Case Foundation, FileNet Business Process Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited
Rangel Logistics Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Case Foundation vs. Studio Creatio and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.