No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

QuickBase vs UiPath Studio comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

QuickBase
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
13th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (15th), Employee Time Tracking Software (1st)
UiPath Studio
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
17th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.3
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (6th)
 

Featured Reviews

Morgan Victor - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Test Engineer at Roche
Automation has transformed project and inventory workflows and improves revenue forecasting
The best features QuickBase offers include being a no-code software, meaning it is very easy to use even for new users. It also provides life cycle management, workflow management, and dashboards. The dashboards and workflow management help my team significantly, as they have a drag-and-drop interface and prebuilt templates, which play a pivotal role in creating custom applications. Those features also help provide the ability to manage the entire application life cycle with QuickBase easily. Integration has been very seamless with our overall IT stack. The user interface is very user-friendly and intuitive, which makes it very easy to use, together with the no-code aspect. Any kind of personnel can use this tool easily.
VijayBhallamudi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Business Analyst at Flix
Citizen developers have automated finance processes and created reusable modules across entities
There are some weaknesses, though nothing on the top of my mind at the moment. From a process and OCR point of view, for example, we are currently doing a use case about e-invoicing. We feel the accuracy that the OCR provides from UiPath Studio was not as high as we had initially anticipated. We had to not go with that module that UiPath Studio offers. UiPath Studio has an a la carte mode where you can buy specific functionalities without having to buy the whole package. We decided to test out a few other tools in the market and bought a customized tool specifically for OCR purposes because UiPath Studio's accuracy was not as great. It comes more on a use case-to-use case basis. Certain use cases that we try show that certain functionalities could be improved, and there is definitely a scope for improvement. That being said, the functionalities that we bought UiPath Studio initially for work pretty well. We wanted a centralized automation hub, an Orchestrator, and maximum license utilization for the bots we were purchasing. They are basic, but at the same time, they are easy to use. The ease of use is one of the main reasons why we still favor UiPath Studio. The AI and OCR parts are something we are looking to explore more in the coming year, and that will probably give us more insights into the functionalities and their value. At the moment, we use Oracle as our ERP. We have not had much success integrating with Oracle so far. UiPath Studio offers a lot of customized integrations for SAP, but not much for Oracle Cloud. We had to leverage our internal ERP in-house team to build integrations. We used Oracle Cloud integrations rather than UiPath Studio integrations with respect to ERP. Every conference or event that UiPath Studio organizes, when we have a chance to speak with someone from UiPath Studio, we bring up Oracle Cloud integrations. I believe that in Europe and the US, Oracle Cloud is growing in usage, so we would appreciate more effort focused there. However, with Salesforce, we used a couple of cases with customer service in our company, and we integrated with it very smoothly without any blockers. At the moment, we have not explored AI and ML capabilities of UiPath Studio as much as we should have. We conducted a series of process discovery workshops in our company, and the use cases we received did not require AI or ML functionalities because they were core finance operations, and we did well with just the regular functionalities of UiPath Studio. We are still looking forward to finding a case where we could leverage AI and ML capabilities. We do not want to use AI functionalities just because we want to use them. It is more of a situation where we ask if it is needed, and we are still looking forward to finding a case that demands the need for AI functionalities or a nice-to-have feature. At the moment, we still have not used or explored those things of UiPath Studio.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"QuickBase has allowed us to easily categorize these employees, workgroups, and work locations into separate tables and then relate them to one another for comprehensive reports."
"Once you have an App, the possibilities are endless."
"Customer Service: Excellent customer service, I always get a quick answer."
"QuickBase powers our entire organization."
"Their support is definitely very helpful; they've been amazing."
"The selecting process/apps/components which can be dynamically operated by an end user."
"If you are trying to automate a workflow, capture a workflow, and have a centralized space for data, I think QuickBase is a great option."
"Quickbase is a powerhouse, with unlimited possibilities and versatility for use."
"Right now we have it deployed, and it is dealing with about 50% of our document volume."
"Compared to other tools, UiPath Studio licensing cost is low."
"The fact that with UiPath Studio we can build reusable modules that we can use across automations has been specifically very useful to us as a company and team driving this project."
"There are a lot of great things in UiPath Studio; whatever is required for the development is there, and I do not think I face any difficulty during the development of any use case from UiPath Studio's side."
"UiPath Studio is good for automating business processes and repetitive tasks within my company."
"I have seen a return on investment because we have saved around one million dollars on a yearly basis with our 1,000 bots."
 

Cons

"When I started to use QB, during the first year, there was a time when QB was not available for several days."
"I would like the product to add more working processes."
"Its UI needs improvement. They should improve it and make it a little bit more modern."
"Quite straightforward, but hard to proceed with further configuration for the holistic view of an operation."
"Its UI needs improvement. They should improve it and make it a little bit more modern. We should also be able to have more real-time information that connects with other software platforms. It has an open API, but it doesn't always connect with some of the other platforms that we would like to utilize. These are probably two of the biggest things for us, and hopefully, they will keep ensuring that in the future, they continually build QuickBase to be a little bit more efficient in that regard."
"It would be beneficial for the QuickBase team to focus on improving the integration of cloud-based storage platforms within their product. In use cases like ours, where QuickBase serves as a centralized source of truth for construction projects, having seamless integration with platforms like Dropbox or OneDrive would greatly enhance the product's capabilities."
"I would like to see the reporting enhanced because some of them are not easy to generate."
"Increasing the number of native integrations with outside products. Quickbase is already starting to do it but having more integration out of the box with other services would make life a bit easier for new comers."
"In terms of improvement for UiPath Studio, while we are currently using the AI capability, I find that Copilot is not that reliable."
"On the improving side, concerning costing, I am not sure because the cost of the new product is very high."
"We feel the accuracy that the OCR provides from UiPath Studio was not as high as we had initially anticipated."
"We are not seeing improved ROI because the bigger chunks of use cases we have already addressed. When we take it down to the medium size, the cost of development and deployment is something which is prohibitive and it doesn't make a good financial business case."
"Some of the recent upgraded versions, the package sometimes create problems, so that has to be tested first and then it should be available in UiPath Studio, because everybody wants to use the latest package, but sometimes when we are using the latest package, it creates problems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing for the tier my company used included ten seats and the subcontractor, amounting to approximately $18,000 USD per year."
"The solution is expensive and geared toward enterprise-level clients."
"It is probably about 300 per license per person. There is just the licensing cost. There are no additional costs."
"We felt the pricing and licensing for QuickBase were easy enough to understand, fair and competitive."
"The product is cheap when compared to other products."
"The pricing for QuickBase is pretty straightforward, It is based on a per user/per month licensing fee."
"Quickbase is probably not the cheapest app out there. That said, it is worth its weight in gold. There is no other app that I know of in the market today that can do what Quickbase does."
"You have to negotiate the price because it varies based on the number of users you have, as well as how much cloud storage space you need."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Low-Code Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
29%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business40
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise28
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for QuickBase?
I did not have any involvement with pricing, setup cost, or licensing.
What needs improvement with QuickBase?
The table size limits are small for really large apps. While I agree that there needs to be a cap on the size, it would be nice to adjust it up when needed. Also, the cost can be a bit prohibitive,...
What is your primary use case for QuickBase?
Our organization uses QuickBase for project management, production, fieldwork tracking, training, training tracking, travel tracking, and more. The platform allows us to standardize workflows acros...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Studio?
I am satisfied with the current price for the product and overall licensing costs. Whatever price is given is provided by the client. We can definitely suggest the amount, and if the client is read...
What needs improvement with UiPath Studio?
In terms of improvement for UiPath Studio, while we are currently using the AI capability, I find that Copilot is not that reliable. The responses we are getting are not at the desired level, so th...
What is your primary use case for UiPath Studio?
My usual use cases for UiPath Studio are in banking and BFSI use cases. Currently, we have around 1,000 plus bots in production, effectively transitioning tasks from manual to automated processes. ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Quick Base, TSheets
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Procter & Gamble, Tesla, Norwegian Cruise Line, Google, Metso, Agero, Kayak, PTC, Patra Corp, TomTom, Southwest Airlines, FedEx Office
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about QuickBase vs. UiPath Studio and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.