We performed a comparison between Mule Anypoint Platform and UiPath Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Workload Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product is very user-friendly."
"Mule works very well with Salesforce and CRMs."
"We are very satisfied with the DevOps support."
"Mule Anypoint Platform is our preferred platform for integration."
"The tool's visual features are attractive."
"The monitoring capabilities of this product are very good because of the feedback it supplies in statistics."
"Mule Anypoint Platform's valuable features are its flexibility in terms of deployment and its SaaS capabilities."
"This is the easiest and best tool available."
"Using UiPath Orchestrator, we can deploy tasks across different environments, including virtual machines, for both attended and unattended processes."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it was a user-friendly product with an intuitive design."
"It allows for the segregation of users, ensuring each user has access to specific environments based on their roles."
"UiPath Orchestration works effectively in deploying, scheduling, and running automated bots across different environments."
"UiPath Orchestrator is a user-friendly solution."
"The product has been pretty amazing at deploying, scheduling, and running automated bots."
"The reporting features are good."
"The platform serves as a valuable tool for orchestrating solutions within an organization."
"This becomes an expensive solution over time."
"Adding connectors for new upcoming applications would add extra value to this product."
"It has different types of subscriptions. For platinum or lower subscriptions, there are not too many things that can be done. We don't see many features. They should release a basic version that has logging and monitoring features. These features should come with Mule Anypoint Platform for free instead of making customers pay separately for these features. Its dashboard can be improved to have a lot of charts so that it is easy to visualize information. The utilization part can be improved. The dashboard is good currently, but it can be better. Other solutions like Elastic have a good dashboard, and they allow you to administer the product from the UI. Currently, for RTF, there is a different dashboard or utility. It would be good to include the same utility in the cloud solution. It would be good if there is a centralized repository that includes the links to the information about various troubleshooting issues. The documentation is there currently, and it is good, but the troubleshooting information is too scattered. We have to go to different links to find troubleshooting information. This kind of centralized repository would be helpful for new customers who are implementing this solution. It will be helpful to see different kinds of issues that can occur."
"Its documentation needed a little bit of work to make it more usable. It is a platform that is used mainly by developers and other people for connecting systems. Its documentation was confusing in some areas and was not very helpful in other areas. I had to go to a consultant to get some work done, which ideally shouldn't be required."
"One area we'd like to see improvement in is the error logging and troubleshooting process."
"Price-wise, it is a good product since it is reasonably priced...Mule Anypoint Platform can get too complex for non-technical people."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Although the solution's proxy design and process are good, it faces connecting issues because it lacks data integration."
"It's a bit difficult to connect to the licenses."
"The credential vault is generic and does not have process categorization. The tool needs to arrange a Customer Success Manager for support. It should also improve the credential manager and integrate a customized form of retrieving the details. There should be more dashboards as well."
"One of the significant challenges we've encountered with UiPath Orchestrator is the frequent and rapid changes in the tool's interface and functionality."
"It takes us time to understand the process before we can publish it. Its pricing needs to be lower, and there needs to be a centralized dashboard."
"The vendor should provide free certification to their partners."
"It is challenging to accurately define text within images for the product."
"The code management for the Studio could be improved."
"The product must provide process mining features."
Mule Anypoint Platform is ranked 8th in Workload Automation with 41 reviews while UiPath Orchestrator is ranked 11th in Workload Automation with 21 reviews. Mule Anypoint Platform is rated 8.2, while UiPath Orchestrator is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Mule Anypoint Platform writes "Robust, reliable, and stable, ensuring high availability for critical integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Orchestrator writes "A user-friendly and reliable tool that is easy to implement". Mule Anypoint Platform is most compared with MuleSoft Composer, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, Oracle Integration Cloud Service, SAP Process Orchestration and SAP Cloud Platform, whereas UiPath Orchestrator is most compared with Control-M. See our Mule Anypoint Platform vs. UiPath Orchestrator report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload 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.
