IQ Bot Reviews

I love IQ Bot. I can extract any type of document. It doesn't matter if we have a background image in the document if it's a colorful document. It doesn't matter. I can extract and work with it regardless. I can train all the instances and properly adjust, inject Python code to find entities, and so on, and so forth. 

IQ Bot is a powerful technology. It's a very, very powerful technology. It's 100% integrated with Automation Anywhere Enterprise without any type of API. When you use Foundation AI and ABBYY, you need to consume APIs or you need to install an integration pack, however, when you work with IQ Bot it's very straightforward. You just consume all your instances very fast.

The problem with IQ Bot is the price. With so many options on the internet, some customers, medium-sized companies, have no budget to pay for IQ Bot, and then they just migrate the IntelligentOCR and all the machine learning to data extraction to cloud providers, such as Foundation AI or ABBYY.

In terms of Automation Anywhere, I did not try it yet, however, until the IQ Bot 11, what I can ask for Automation Anywhere to improve is just NLP and NLU, to extract body emails or an unstructured text.

I don't know if we can use IQ Bot with another RPA vendor by just integrating IQ Bot through API. I don't know if it's possible. I'm working with UiPath as well and I don't know if we can use IQ Bot with UiPath. 

We'd like just a bit more improved technology. Sometimes we send documents with less than 300 DPI. I know that Automation Anywhere just said that IQ Bot 11 and higher versions are ready to extract the documents with less than 300 DPI, however, this is not true. I never could work with documents with less than 300 DPI.

I've worked with the solution for more than 12 months. 

I've also used Foundation AI and ABBYY, however, they require the use of APIs.

The solution is largely pretty expensive, especially for smaller organizations. 

We are a partner of Automation Anywhere.

I work with Automation Anywhere. I never worked with Power Automate before. I've been working with Automation Anywhere for the last four years, since version 10. Automation Anywhere is evolving. In the beginning, it had so many bugs. Things didn't work as expected. Now, with version A360 and also with A11, I can deliver all the business expectations with Automation Anywhere Enterprise IQ Bot.

I've already deployed three environments. I also participated in two big migrations without any hitch, without any problems. They're well-documented by Automation Anywhere and the product is very reliable. I never faced a platform downtime, big downtime, with the platform doing application error. I haven't had even database issues. What I can say about Automation Anywhere is that Automation Anywhere just delivers everything I need to deploy all business processes, no matter the line of business. If you were talking about manufacturing, if you were talking about finance or insurance companies, I can deploy and automate almost all processes using Automation Anywhere.

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use IQ Bot to automate courses.

IQ Bot's best features are its variety of outputs and how it handles structured documents.

IQ Bot doesn't accept or manage unstructured documents properly.

I've been using IQ Bot for a year and a half.

IQ Bot has some problems with stability.

The initial setup was easy.

IQ Bot is good at handling structured documents, but if you have a lot of unstructured or handwritten documents, I recommend using Hyper Center instead. I would rate IQ Bot five out of ten.

We are using IQ Bot for document processing. The use cases are predominantly around NLP and document processing.

It has a lot of great features.

The solution has been quite stable. 

The capabilities meet our needs.

It offers a pretty simple setup process.

So far, the product looks like it can scale.

We've been happy with the product as a whole. There are no missing features.

From what we are operating from now, we don't see any problem areas or anything that needs improvement. 

I would like love to see pre-trained models based on industries. If I'm looking at an insurance domain, if the UiPath, IQ Bot has an algorithm that is pre-trained with the various formats that are available in the market, that would reduce a good amount of development time.

We've used the solution for almost a year or maybe a bit more.

The solution is stable. We have not faced any performance issues as of now. That said, it's still new and we shall see down the line when we cross a critical threshold, how it is behaving.

At this point in time, we are still onboarding use cases. The variety will increase, and the volume as well, likely in the near term. At that time we would come to an understanding about the processing speed and the scalability. Since it is a SaaS product, we have the confidence that it would be available on demand. 

We have been doing everything on our own. We haven't had to reach out to technical support for assistance just yet.

We found the initial setup to be quite simple and quite straightforward. It's a SaaS and therefore not complicated to deploy.

Right now, since it is a fresh and ongoing engagement, the same team builds, deploys, and supports. It's only when you complete the automation development that you would need a team for support. Therefore, at this point in time, there is not much support activity that I foresee. Only time will tell once we enter into everything, what will be the staffing requirement. 

Doing it as a SaaS takes a lot of headaches out. Only the operations would be required to just ensure that the bots have been running. I tend to believe it would not be much of a strain on personnel in terms of maintenance in the future.

Most of the support that we do is predominantly of the infrastructure, maintenance, networking, and all that stuff. On top of that, we will also have the patching, upgrades, and all of that. That is where we see most of the support going. However, for a bot operation, supports are not that high. It is limited. It would be around 12% of the overall team size and it would be in the build state.

We implement the solution for clients. 

I'm not sure of the exact cost related to the solution. I would not have the numbers as this is directly done by the delivery team, which is on the ground. I belong to the overall automation where the costs are billed directly to the project.

Whenever it's UiPath versus Automation Anywhere, and both numbers are looking the same, it's a little higher on the Automation Anywhere compared to UiPath.

In relative terms, Automation Anywhere is a little costlier - maybe 10% more than UiPath. However, UiPath recently increased its license cost. That happened just a few weeks before. 

We are using IQ Bots and they are gaining popularity. We have some solutions around the IQ Bots. In fact, for Automation Anywhere, mostly the clients have IQ Bots as that's around the telecom space and they've gone with the SaaS solution of Automation Anywhere.

With IQ Bot, you need to ensure that you have the right amount of database freedom. If you train with less amount of data, your accuracy goes down, and the confidence score goes down. Then, you come up with the problem of inaccurate executions. When training, it's important, to have the right amount of data and what we are extracting. I'd also advise adopting a co-bot approach for the initial attempts until you believe that it is well trained enough to make it automatic.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We primarily use our IQ Bot for scanning documents that we get from the vendors. That is number one. We also use it as an HR input tool. When we receive physical documents from an employee wishing to join us, we run them past our IQ Bot solution, updating the master for all employees.

Ours is a retail business, so we use the solution to do continuous management of our recruitment process. From this perspective, maintaining the records of our employees is one of our key challenges. We use the solution primarily for HR data input, although we also employ it for backups.

At times we have to carry the nutrition facts as these relate to our billing cycle in respect of employees and customers.

Should the employee or customer request this, we must scan the nutrition facts of all the treated goods into our system. Previously, this took time, as there were errors such as would be found with the different classes of sodium-potassium or something in a particular product. We do this with an IQ Bot, as well. But, this is at the proof of concept stage. We have not gone with the dark system, the HR system being light.

The extraction feature is the most valuable. Because the post-processing and the pre-processing are very standardized, even from a classification point of view, things are fairly simple, as you still need somebody to feed the data. But, the place where I found the IQ Bots to be a par change in comparison with the other solutions is on the Extraction piece, as it uses good and middle technologies to extract the specific data that we require from the documents.

While there is adaptability in terms of the data series, an issue that should be addressed concerns different sizes sitting on deck, for something that can be done respecting the terms of the sizing of the template that the bot should be. 

Another issue is that the user should be able to update the data libraries. When it comes to small matters, a person should not need to be at the mercy of an implementation partner or Automation Anywhere for the receipt of instructions to reach out to the technical helpers

For other matters, we worked proactively with IQ Bot to address pain areas that we had encountered in our prior experience, such as that of the design evaluation or of the work we had done with our hardware providers in terms of the quality of the scanning and compression technology. This we addressed because of the inordinate burden on hardware capacity when doing high image scans, something which tremendously raises the size boost. So, we have, over time, optimized that along with the Automation Anyway team.

For anything in a standard location, we have fixed the sizes and do examples in the time of the ULT. Our extensive proactive work with IQ Bot reduced our pain areas.

Furthermore, in the past, I had forgone solutions that are in the scanning mode, such as vendor invoice management or OpenText from this or from Kofax. We contemplated the advantages and disadvantages of a scanning solution, a matter we have been instrumental in addressing. We now refrain from trying to do every conceivable task and to scan the entire document.

I have been using IQ Bot within the past 12 months.

We are not using the latest version of the solution. We have employed the more minor of its two upgrades but not the one which matches the latest version.

The solution is reliable. This said, I always explain to people who ask me about any RPA solution that there are two challenges. The first is that a person will have to estimate the running cost of the IQ Bot throughout the life cycle use of a new plan. So, it should not be evaluated as a one-time solution, as there is a maintenance fee required. A license renewal fee of core EMC charges must be paid. All of this should be taken into account. 

Keeping in mind the licensing fees incurred by Automation Anywhere, a deal should be made irrespective of the number of pages.

Otherwise, one may find himself countering good value properties, such as if another license must be purchased after 50,000 or100,000 pages. This would defeat the purpose of the time and investment made in the solution.

As such, one should never view the account being offered as too high to preclude its use. This situation can be encountered faster than one would think. In light of this, it is always better to opt for an unlimited, rather than a limited, license.

It is difficult for me to assess the solution's scalability. We have around 2,000 employees and, assuming that everybody has eight to 10 credentials to be shared, we are attaching only 20,000 or 30,000 copies. So, we haven't, as yet, reached the full potential.

We did not need to make use of the solution's technical support. This is because we made use of our critical six month EMC contract, as part of the standard implementation ring, something we did with Tanium based on our past experience. This allowed us to address, during the six months of post goal life, anything and everything that was not working with the bot.

The initial setup was complex, because if you look at employee certification and data it comes in various forms and formats. It's not like it is with standard A4, A5 or Legal text. Since the shapes vary, we considered the building of a database of the forms and formats to be key, which reduced our pain area.

We are trained to notice when a particular form and factor is not present, something which would stick out to us. This would be, subsequently, fed as a master template into the system, at which point the bot would take over.

This way we reduced the error rate from the bot, updating the master accordingly and its basis for being taken forward.

This allows us to create and feed a format into the system, for recruitment purposes, so that the bot may reference it.

Consequently, our pain areas are dramatically reduced, eliminating much tedium.

The licensing is under usage per page, and I wouldn't recommend it. You should buy it unlimited rather than be restricted in terms of the number of pages.

The pricing has room for improvement. If I had to benchmark all three RPA vendors, I would say that UiPath is cheaper than Automation Anywhere. The second would be Automation Anywhere in terms of flexibility, which beats out UiPath and Blue Prism. This latter is just brewing in India and has yet to grow to the preferred size, as they do not have any customer care based out of the country. It is, instead, based out of the United States, something which does not help me. 

In my present company, I was the one who bought RPA and, as part of that solution, we had also gone ahead and bought IQ Bot.

We have a team of eight people who are using the solution. The bot is structured so that it is used by different people for a variety of activities. One is for master creation, both of an employee and a vendor being involved in the system. Therein we get third party documents, which can be read by the bot.

The second concerns the extensive use of the solution that we employ for the reading of invoice copies.

The third concerns the nutrition elements. So, we have roughly two to three people from each function who use it, meaning fewer than 10 people utilizing it at present. 

While it is a manned bot, everybody has a schedule. Every Monday morning, for two hours, we handle nine or ten with HR. The recruitment is dealt with on the first Monday of the week. That's when natives run by HR the nutrition or other items. We typically run it on Nemesis, because that's when we have twigged our back-end system to get the deliveries on the deal set date, whereby we can use the bot at one signal run.

This is the point at which we have done the scheduling to manage the bot. 

One should not implement this solution until he has the desire to do so. We received it as part of a bundled offer, meaning we had to look for solutions allowing us to make use of it. Only if there is a large amount of scanning, such as a case in which 90 letters produce highly voluminous activity, is an IQ Bot the best solution, absent which a person can manage without the bot. We had already considered HR, but only for the searching of around 20,000 or 30,000 tickets.

If a person has the desired volumes, I would rate IQ Bot as an eight out of ten.

I would say that the best feature is that it has native automation for the US. At the end of the day, you still have to do the same amount of coding to actually pull that data into your code, but with the automation, you are sending it to part of the same kernel, or the same interface, and that makes it much easier. Because I've seen sometimes that they say that even ABI can go with BPA, at least according to the label. But with less than 300 BPA, I see that it's not really possible. Same with the kernel. If there are a lot of tables and frames, it messes it up. But that doesn't happen for IQ Bot.

The first place it could be improved is its price - it is too high. I'm having a lot of difficulties moving it to the customers. If they could fix that it would be awesome. Because the Automation Anywhere is hardware-intensive, it requires other set-ups, a control room, and it's already taking 16 GB of space. Then if I move to IQ Bot, and I have to set up another server for it, it becomes pretty expensive. And that is where the hardware cost comes in. So I think that if they could reduce the cost thing it would be really helpful.

I would say it is the best choice, especially if you're already on Automation Anywhere. They are working at implementing third-party tools. Right now, I am with the company, but before that, I was with another company as well as IQ Bot. A lot of people have purchased a lot of license work but they have not actually put it to good use, or they were unable to. So, it is a question of quality control. But then again, from a CTA perspective, I would say I know it is possible to increase the optical features, as well.

I am not referring to just character recognition, but for example, let's have the scanner import that image properly. Sometimes in a test it happens that the picture is a bit clearer. Or let's say a company logo. If a print is misaligned, it can figure it out. So I am more than happy regarding their automation technology.

I have been using IQ Bot for about four or five years.

The problem is that some of the invoices are very sensitive. If one of these invoices had bad handwriting it just fizzles out, so what has it accomplished? I think it should be able to scan while it is running itself. It should pop up and say, "I am unable to read this can you please help." In that way, we need more traffic to end-users. Then the bot clears one business invoice. But maybe you can have a guy in shipping who just got there while the bot is running, when these jobs start they post those really fast. The reading part might get confusing.

If the bot could just pop up and say, "look at this is the one that I'm confused with, can you please clarify?" If it could do that while the bot is running in IQ Bot, that would be super cool.

I think there are some security issues if you want to scale up. There are two versions - standard and deluxe, standard for basic bot and deluxe for interface with optical printing. So if you scale more than 20 bots, you have to buy more. We work on our commission anyway so you can have a thousand bots running from the same thing for you.

I was in touch with support a couple of times. They are good. There are two parts to the support. One part is in India, where they recently fired a lot of people. The other part is in the US. That team is awesome.

The support guy I got was a champion. He's the one who helped me with IQ Bot to begin with. The point is that it is okay in terms of the system. But let's say there is a call for the controller. With some claims you should not give permission for virtual control because if the agent crashes it also crashes the other systems that are connected to it, which are not visible to them.

I'll tell you the good part and the bad part of Automation Anywhere. Automation Anywhere is amazing for people who have a vision, a plan, and a strategy. People who know what they are doing and are technically sound. Because automation generally comes with a loss of a sense of control. You need to know to whom to give access and for what. Now the problem is that your computer is your own bot. Now what happens with the bot is that they don't necessarily need an architecture to run it. For Automation Anywhere you really need a control room, and a control room costs $7,000 to $10,000. That's what we get for my company. So that becomes a big roadblock.

Because you can just clear the bot, you can get it to stop. You do not necessarily have to connect to the conclusion to run the bot. I can put some code into the batch file and make it run while the bot is running. But you cannot fulfill your function there. So that is a pro and a con.

Specifically for IQ Bot, I would say the setups that I have done took me about seven to 10 days, at the most.

I would say first to do another determination to see if it's worth it. For example, if you are a banking company and you tell me that I'll have a lot of checks that will need to be verified, I would say that's fine, because the format of the checks will be standard. Although you would have to identify the handwriting. But still, at least the amount of coding is easier. However, if you are doing B2B or B2C, and you have multiple invoices coming in to you, I would say don't do it. Because in India, they're very strategic. I can have a person actually putting it into Excel and then I can have a bot taking over. So that's why I already see that it's very important.

The technology should be business-oriented. So unless it is a high-ticket item they won't even talk to me, because business is first. So if you are trying to host a business on your product it is never going to fly. And the problem with automation is that it is close-ended, it is not initial.

They are pointed towards automated scenarios. You can download a version and do things, but they won't listen to the guys who write the code on the ground technical level. They have a different way of operating, because at the end of the day, it is just business. Their mindset is to catch on to the top-level bosses or leaders.

You can do it for a couple of months, or maybe a year or two. They launched version 7.3 two years back, all with multiple backers. In two years you are ensuring that you are out of date. Do you think any product with a life cycle of two years is worth it? I don't. You don't even get value return in two years. Because of the building of the bots, building on a higher component, it takes minimum three years or more to break even. And that is with your bot not completing your applications.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate IQ Bot a 7.

I was using this solution when I was providing a service to a customer. I used the solution for invoice processing.

The solution is able to extract information from invoices which were helpful for my company.

The valuable feature of IQ Bot is the AI functionality.

The solution did not allow the use of other OCR and their own was not accurate and could improve.

I have used IQ Bot within the last 12 months.

The solution is used daily.

I rate the scalability of IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

The support could improve.

I rate the support of IQ Bot a five out of ten.

Neutral

The deployment took three to four months.

I rate the initial setup of IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

There are other solutions on the market that are better.

I advise others to ensure their documents are properly extracted as part of the OCR.

I rate IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

We use IQ Bot to extract information from our PDFs as well as for differentiating between them. I'm an RPA developer and we are customers of IQ Bot.

We're dealing with millions of invoice statements and IQ Bot can be super helpful in identifying those invoices and classifying them. It saves us a lot of time and money.

The ability to differentiate between documents is a valuable feature.

Lacks sufficient flexibility in identifying a wider variety of documents such as those that have different dimensions and quality. It would be helpful if even low-quality documents could be identified. They also need to work on the deployment of backups.

I've been using this solution for around eight months. 

The automation team takes a while to work on any tickets and respond. 

The initial setup is moderate in terms of complexity.

It's an expensive solution but we get good results and the benefits outweigh the cost. 

I expect we'll increase usage because it's a super useful tool for our business team and it has a lot of use cases. I rate this product eight out of 10. 

IQ Bot is typically an artificial intelligence (AI) tool that looks at unstructured data to make some sense of it. Basically, you use it in accounting, accounts payable, and accounts receivable where you want to read unstructured data and turn it into something with which you can do something.

We are using its latest version.

The single platform capabilities are most valuable. I don't need to go to another third-party such as Blue Prism or UiPath. They have all these other bolt-on solutions. It is a part of the Automation Anywhere platform. It is all integrated.

There should be built-in or native intelligent processing capabilities.

I have been working with this solution for about two years.

It is extremely stable. It is used by Fortune 100 companies, and we're very happy with the results.

It was straightforward. We have services that we leveraged, and it was pretty easy. Its implementation took two weeks.

We have integrators who help us implement it.

It does everything that we need it to do. It is a great product. It is very underrated. More companies should leverage this platform.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10.