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

OpenText Process Automation vs OutSystems comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

OpenText Process Automation
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (17th)
OutSystems
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Mobile Development Platforms (1st), Rapid Application Development Software (4th), Low-Code Development Platforms (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Process, Business Automation, and Digital Transformation solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Process Automation is designed for Business Process Management (BPM) and holds a mindshare of 0.7%, up 0.4% compared to last year.
OutSystems, on the other hand, focuses on Low-Code Development Platforms, holds 8.3% mindshare, down 9.6% since last year.
Business Process Management (BPM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Process Automation0.7%
Camunda16.0%
SAP Signavio Process Manager6.5%
Other76.8%
Business Process Management (BPM)
Low-Code Development Platforms Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OutSystems8.3%
Microsoft Power Apps13.8%
Appian9.5%
Other68.4%
Low-Code Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Senthil Natarajan - PeerSpot reviewer
The solution enables automation of supply chain and invoice processing with comprehensive integration and workflow capabilities
The main valuable features of OpenText AppWorks are the BPM modules. There is the standard BPM modeler and a case modeler. These are two strong features from the workflow layer. Additionally, the integration capability of the solution is beneficial. With these features, we are able to use OpenText AppWorks for automating supply-chain-related problems, vendor process automations, and invoice automations. We have built almost twenty-plus types of solutions and implemented around three hundred fifty-plus implementations. The solution also allows us to integrate it with our ERP system.
Sukrut Joshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables users to develop applications quickly and has a responsive and helpful technical support team
The time to market is quite good. We can quickly develop an application using the tool. OutSystems is developed using .NET and Java. We can easily find technical resources who have worked on .NET and Java and leverage their previous knowledge to develop OutSystems applications. It can also be used for application development. If an end-user does not want to use the solution after two to three years, OutSystems sends the source code and the applications to the end-user. There is no dependency. It’s one of the major factors I found quite good in OutSystems.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"From a business perspective, the most valuable aspect lies in the optimization of processes."
"The good part of OpenText AppWorks is that all of its components are together in one platform, including integration capability, UI capability, and workflow capability."
"The monitoring aspect is highly valuable, as it offers an exceptional capability to track every minute of action performed by a business user in the global context."
"We really appreciate the process automation and how can you create human tasks as one of your processes."
"One of the most useful features is the code is customizable, we can make it our own."
"OpenText AppWorks has standard features such as system-to-system and human-to-human integrations, but what I find most valuable in the solution is its monitoring feature that tells you more about your processes, how to restart and how to stop each process, etc."
"We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenText AppWorks, especially those incorporating low-code functionalities, have had a significant positive impact. In some cases, we've observed a remarkable reduction in development time, ranging from 50 to 75 percent. The MTP model and life cycle have facilitated rapid development cycles."
"AppWorks is a very quick development platform with low-coding capability and strong integration with third-party systems."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of OutSystems is easy."
"Integrations with external systems with SOAP and REST are easy to implement off-the-shelf, but a developer can always implement specific libraries for other integrations."
"Reduces the manual labor in compiling and deploying applications and generating procedural code (by reducing development bureaucracy/processes, resulting in real gains). The LifeTime Server approach, requiring just a few steps to publish applications in production environments, is fantastic."
"You can go huge - so it is definitely a scalable solution."
"We can do the validation before calling the API."
"The scalability of OutSystems is very good, it scales automatically very useful for us."
"The product is mostly stable."
"The most important features of this tool are its visual modeling capabilities and drag and drop functionality. You can see what you are coding which makes it easy to understand and maintain. They have also created a big revolution in digital transformation by introducing native mobile app development under the same IDE."
 

Cons

"OpenText AppWork's low-code capabilities can be enhanced by integrating them with AI offerings like Aviator."
"From an enterprise point, their pricing is a little bit crazy because they don't have a SaaS model."
"The integration could improve."
"OpenText needs improvements in its integration model to align with newer integration types."
"A room for improvement in OpenText AppWorks is its user interface. It should have mobile compatibility because right now, you still have to make two applications with a user interface for Android and a user interface for iOS, so if OpenText AppWorks can provide one UI that can be used across all devices, that would make the solution better. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of OpenText AppWorks is a better UI in terms of the look and feel. Another feature I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is mobile compatibility because, at the moment, you have to make your application mobile-ready or compatible with mobile devices because there's no provision for it in OpenText AppWorks."
"The solution needs to continue to enhance the low-coding feature within the product itself."
"AppWorks could be improved by including BPM simulation."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"It is hard to find the logic in OutSystems. From an improvement perspective, I want to be able to properly use logic in OutSystems."
"Mobile apps need improvement."
"There is room for improvement in technical support."
"The resource availability needs to be increased."
"The product's high price is an area of concern, where improvements are required."
"The asynchronous processing and multithreading tasks for which the current resources of the platform are very generic and not built for the end-user. Any asynchronous jobs have to be constructed with an end-user dashboard to allow inspection of the status of the activities."
"The PDD framework can't be used for the behavioral-driven development way of working."
"There are not enough resources on the market."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a user-based perpetual license."
"Pricing for OpenText AppWorks, specifically in the Indian market, is reasonable, but I'm not aware if it's still reasonable outside of India. The licensing cost is based on the number of licenses and the number of users. OpenText AppWorks has different licensing options."
"The price is on the higher side."
"The licensing cost varies based on several factors, such as the size of the customer and the domain URL."
"AppWorks is pretty expensive."
"I think the pricing for OutSystems is comparable with similar solutions. I would place it somewhere in the middle. We pay for the bundle and don't pay anything extra in terms of licensing and other fees."
"It's not cheap. It's pretty expensive."
"I would rate it five to six out of ten."
"OutSystems is an expensive product. My company has to make monthly payments towards the licensing costs attached to the solution."
"The product is expensive and I would rate its pricing a seven out of ten. You need to pay a yearly subscription to use the product."
"The solution is expensive."
"I believe they have two pricing options. One is approximately $4000 USD a year and the other is approximately $10,000 USD a year."
"The solution is expensive. The platform is not suitable for all of my clients. I work with labor unions and other smaller organizations that would not be able to afford the platform's current pricing model. It would be beneficial if there were a scaled-down version or a tiered pricing option that would allow me to build an app or a web app that is more cost-effective for my clients. Currently, the platform's pricing is too high for many of my clients, who would not be able to afford something in the $50,000 to $100,000 range."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
871,469 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Insurance Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about OpenText AppWorks?
We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenTex...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenText AppWorks?
From an enterprise point, their pricing is a little bit crazy because they don't have a SaaS model. They have to go with a perpetual model, which makes it look crazy initially. But over a period, i...
What needs improvement with OpenText AppWorks?
They can improve the UI capability. Recently, they launched a low-code platform, called entity modeling, which they can enhance further. It would be beneficial if OpenText ( /products/data-express-...
Which solution is better for developing non-ITSM applications: OutSystems or Service Now?
The short answer is that OutSystems is far better for 2 main reasons. Firstly, with Service Now you are locked into that platform for good. The business model is to lock in and then keep pumping th...
What industries do you think OutSystems is most useful for?
I cannot really name an industry in which OutSystems cannot be beneficial. Who does not want to make top-notch applications that work in no time? And OutsyStems does exactly that. The low-code plat...
How did you decide which OutSystems edition was the best one for you?
We started using OutSystems fairly recently, so we are still on the free version of it. My company is still testing how we like the platform, but so far, we have been satisfied with it and will li...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Red Deer County, DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance, Bangkok Airways, PBS, CIZ (Netherlands Ministry of Health), The Dutch Ministry of Defence, Mercer
Randstad, Warner Brothers, HP, Intel, ING, Banco Popular, Thrivent Financial, Bacardi, Kent State University, Bacardi, FICO, ING, Vodafone, AbbVie, Estafeta, Siemens, Vopak
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Process Automation vs. OutSystems and other solutions. Updated: July 2023.
871,469 professionals have used our research since 2012.