IBM WebSphere BPMS vs Make comparison

IBM and Make are both solutions in the Process Automation category. IBM is ranked #33 with an average rating of 7.0, while Make is ranked #31 with an average rating of 8.0. IBM holds a 0.2% mindshare in PA, compared to Make’s 0.9% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of Make users who would recommend it.

IBM WebSphere BPMS

Read 6 IBM WebSphere BPMS reviews

172 Views
39 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Make

Read 4 Make reviews

327 Views
48 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

IBM WebSphere BPMS

Make

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

IBM WebSphere BPMS and Make compete in the business management domain, with IBM WebSphere BPMS focusing on business process management and Make on workflow automation. Make appears to have an advantage due to its flexibility and cost-effective integration capabilities.

Features: IBM WebSphere BPMS is recognized for robust process automation, enterprise-grade security, and suitability for large-scale operations. Make stands out with highly customizable workflow automation, ease of integration with numerous third-party applications, and adaptability suited for small to medium-sized enterprises.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM WebSphere BPMS features a more complex deployment that might necessitate professional services, while its customer service is noted for being comprehensive. Make offers a straightforward, cloud-based deployment that is user-friendly and quick, alongside responsive customer service tailored for real-time integration support, offering an advantage in deployment and support responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: IBM WebSphere BPMS entails a considerable initial investment, potentially leading to a longer ROI period, though its extensive features justify the cost for larger corporations. Make's pricing is competitive with lower setup costs and faster ROI, due to its efficient integration and automation, making it suitable for organizations seeking cost-effective, quickly beneficial solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM WebSphere BPMS vs. Make Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere BPMS vs. Make

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 peers since 2012

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 WebSphere BPMS

Ranking in Process Automation

33rd

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Make

Ranking in Process Automation

31st

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere BPMS is 0.2%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Make is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Process Automation

Featured Reviews

Samuel Tsang

Senior Project Manager at Bank Of China(Hong Kong) Limited

Systematic role management and flexible integration improve efficiency, but low-code capabilities and setup complexity need addressing

The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere BPMS ( /products/ibm-websphere-bpms-reviews ) is the systematic framework it provides for building different systems. The critical component is the authorization within the workflow assignment, which is an attractive aspect of this tool. It has helped us in systematic role management within the workflow. Additionally, it offers flexible integration capabilities facilitating front-end and back-end separation practices, allowing for technologies like Angular and Spring Boot ( /products/spring-boot-reviews ).

Read full review

Yaniv Ivgi

Business Owner at Chatbot-sales

An affordable cloud solution for automation and data manipulation

Make has a single IP. We cannot use a single IP because of the security. There are a lot of crashes when you work manually. Also, they need to provide more models. When you have an error, Make should inform them with guidance before you make the mistake. There is a lot of data you can confuse.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We like the feature in which we can trace back instances."

"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere BPMS is the systematic framework it provides for building different systems."

"The UI capabilities of the solution are great. The speed of delivery is good."

"IBM WebSphere BPMS provides significant return on investments, especially in the BAW component."

"This product is flexible in its ability to integrate processes and it can be extended and integrated with other software."

"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."

"Make saves a lot of time, and I have created really complex scenarios in Make."

"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."

"The most valuable features of Make are the additional options when compared to other similar solutions. For example, with Google my business, you can only do certain things with Zapier, whereas with Make, you can do a little bit more."

Cons

"The solution lacks acceptable stability."

"The user interface could be improved, and although integration opportunities are good, they could be improved further."

"Sometimes there are tasks that failed without any reason."

"There is a need for more capabilities in low-code and no-code development to increase efficiency and make implementation simpler."

"Looking forward, IBM WebSphere BPMS could add more adapters to integrate with SAP or Salesforce integrator in upcoming releases."

"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."

"Make could improve the ease of use, it can be more complicated than other solutions. There are a lot of elements that are more technical than in other solutions."

"Make can be a bit difficult to use for new users, but for someone with technical knowledge and some coding skills, it becomes manageable, especially with Make's great UI features that really help."

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The price of Make is approximately $20 per month for the platform."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere BPMS?

There is a need for more capabilities in low-code and no-code development to increase efficiency and make implementation simpler. The tool currently involves a complex setup requirement, and having...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for IBM WebSphere BPMS?

We use IBM WebSphere BPMS ( /products/ibm-websphere-bpms-reviews ) internally in the bank for process automation and management. Our IT department self-builds different systems to serve various use...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering IBM WebSphere BPMS?

I recommend IBM WebSphere BPMS for large enterprises concerned with total system management. It is not ideal for SMB due to its complexity and the need for significant IT resources. I rate it seven...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Make?

I find the pricing, setup costs, and licensing costs of Make to be reasonable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Make?

I don't think there's anything else Make needs, but one improvement could be the addition of no-code steps that can be used within Make, similar to what Zapier offers with its own actions.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Make?

As an entrepreneur and a freelancer who also runs my own agency, I use Make to set up automations for my clients. Recently, the most use cases are of AI agent or AI calling agent, but when I starte...

See all answers

Comparisons

No data available

Camunda vs Make

Compared 57% of the time

Appian vs Make

Compared 30% of the time

Tray.io vs Make

Compared 13% of the time

More Make Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere BPMS

June 2025

Download IBM WebSphere BPMS product report

Buyer's Guide

Process Automation

June 2025

Download Make product report

Also Known As

WebSphere BPMS

Integromat

Overview

Information not available

IBM

Visualize everything you do

Make lets you visually build workflows to solve complex problems - the way you imagine them in your mind.

Drag and drop to connect apps
Use the playful drag-and-drop builder to connect apps in a few clicks, and build workflows called scenarios.

Design infinite workflows
Build scenarios with as many steps or apps as you need.

Watch data flow in real time
Build your scenario and watch it run in real time. Schedule your scenario to run instantly or whenever you need it.

Make

Sample Customers

Schahin Group, Korean Credit Card Company, Versicherungskammer Bayern, Biogrid Australia

Buan Consulting, Armadia

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere BPMS vs. Make

June 2025

Free Report: IBM WebSphere BPMS vs. Make

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere BPMS vs. Make and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM WebSphere BPMS vs. Make 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.