UiPath Platform Reviews

At Aeyon, we use UiPath to develop custom solutions for our clients that drive innovation and digital transformation within the public sector. We work closely with the US Marine Corps, Army, Navy, Coast Guard, NASA and several other Federal agencies. We have built 50+ automations for a wide range of use cases, but the ones we see most often include financial reconciliation, data extraction using AI/ML Models, data entry, data manipulation/consolidation, downloading/moving files in bulk, data validation, and interacting with various web applications.

The business objective that our organization is trying to achieve with its AI-powered automation initiative is to greatly reduce the time spent on repetitive/clerical tasks and allow the employees more time to focus on the important tasks that grow their business such as collaboration and innovation. Aeyon successfully helps our client achieve this objective by using UiPath to develop solutions that increase efficiency, reduce operating costs, and drive ROI.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has fundamentally changed what our organization is able to achieve. It has made a huge impact on the way we process documents for not only ourselves but our clients as well. It saved a lot of time and money.

We use AI Center for data extraction on structured and unstructured document types. The pre-built models are very versatile and efficient, and the ability to train custom models makes it a great solution for almost any use case. I feel that AI Center and UiPath Document Understanding were pretty easy to learn. It only took me about a week to learn. There are tons of helpful tutorials and other resources online. I like how it has the prebuilt models as well as the option to be able to go and train your own data, so I would give it a ten out of ten.

It has definitely increased the accuracy of our operations. It has reduced the risk of clerical errors. Document processing has allowed us to be able to compare data for that extra layer of making sure that everything is extracted correctly.

It has freed up a lot of time because instead of having to manually go through and find ways to track data or manually look at it, we are able to use different AI technologies to fit pretty much any use case. For most of our clients, it saves them an average of about 100 hours annually on the smaller processes, and then we have some larger ones where they are even saving about 15,000 hours annually, which is a lot of extra free time for them to focus on collaboration and those kinds of things.

A lot of the prebuilt models that are on an AI Center are valuable. Being able to go in there and train your data, give sample data, label the fields, and different OCR methods are also valuable.

The improvement is not necessarily in the product itself. The main difficulty we have usually has to do with pricing and identifying the best solution for each specific use case on a long-term scale. If there was an easier way to track the AI unit usage and determine which pricing plan would best fit the need for each use case, then that would be extremely valuable.

UiPath is very stable. I have not had any issues in terms of that. The only issue we used to have was if a website were to change or an application were to change, but we have found ways to work around that and deal with those types of situations.

I have been using UiPath for about four years.

Overall, it is very stable. There is low technical debt and monitoring. After a process has been deployed, for the most part, it is stable after testing and everything.

It is very scalable. I have had no issues in that department, and I know that they continue to make it more and more scalable, which is awesome to see with each new release.

Their support is great. There are so many resources available online. There is UiPath Academy, and there is the ability to chat with them 24/7. I have never had an issue getting in touch with their representative quickly when I needed help with something. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

I started off using UiPath, and then I got a job a few years back where I used a software called Kofax. I was able to see a lot of similarities, but I still felt that it was very limited in its ability to integrate with third-party software. I remember several use cases where I thought that if this was UiPath, I would know how to do it. I noticed a lot of limitations with Kofax. It was a bit of a learning curve going from UiPath to Kofax, and then I realized that there were a lot of things that Kofax was not able to integrate with in terms of third-party software. Based on my experience with Kofax, I definitely feel that UiPath is superior.

I have used Microsoft Power Automate for a few processes. We use that for some of our smaller projects. We just started looking into that as an option as well for certain use cases. It is important to us that UiPath has orchestration whereas Microsoft Power Automate does not because orchestration gives you a way to run processes in the background rather than on your local machine. You can also do event triggering and time schedules. UiPath definitely gives a lot more options and freedom to be able to do things without having to manually run the process.

I was involved in its initial setup. I pretty much came in when it was coming from the ground up. I have helped install it. I have helped customers set their licensing plans and install everything on their local machines so that they can run the automation and get set up with orchestration and all that.

Its initial setup was pretty straightforward. You need to have UiPath Studio installed. They now offer automation. They have UiPath Cloud. You just sign into that, and you have access to Orchestrator and all of those services just right off the web. It is pretty easy to set up.

Our implementation strategy includes getting on a Teams call with the client so that we are able to look at their screen and walk them step by step through various aspects, such as:

• Where to save specific folders?
• How to get signed in to the appropriate account?
• How to access Orchestrator and the logs in there to see if there are any issues with the process?
• How to monitor it?

We look at their screen and walk them through various things. We keep that communication line open if they ever have issues or questions in the future.

We did not take any external help. Our company did it through our own team members.

We try to calculate ROI for all of our clients for projects that we deploy. We usually calculate it in terms of total cost savings annually and also in terms of how many hours of labor are being saved annually. It is cool to see those numbers continuing to grow.

The licensing is very affordable, especially when you compare its benefits. However, I know that AI units are purchased separately and can be costly depending on the specific use case. We are still trying to figure out how to track our usage and which tier or plan to go with, but overall, it is affordable in comparison to other options.

I evaluated Automation Anywhere as well as Blue Prism. At my last company, we were trying to figure out between those two and UiPath. After comparing everything on a wider scale, we realized that UiPath was going to be the better solution for us.

I would rate UiPath a ten out of ten.

Oracle has three broad categories: HCM, PPM, and finance. I have used UiPath to automate mainframe applications. I have automated all types of automation, including ServiceNow processes, PDFs, APIs, and web-based automation.

UiPath has a large number of Java and Python developers. Its modularization of packages for different types of activities and automation is very well done. UiPath also collects suggestions from end users and developers, such as those using the free UiPath software. In fact, UiPath does not release its enterprise edition directly; instead, it releases a free edition for developers to use and provide feedback on the forums. This gives UiPath a significant advantage. Additionally, UiPath has made its tool flexible by building it on the .NET framework but allowing users to also use Java and Python. This gives UiPath another advantage over other tools. I am not sure if other tools offer this type of functionality, but I know that UiPath does because I have used it for a long time.

It can connect systems that don't communicate with each other, enabling us to share data between systems using bots, which is important in the healthcare industry.

The application that was built for our organization is not capable of handling millions of users because it is very old. We must consider the Citrix application, the mainframe applications, and the desktop applications, which are also old. They were not designed to handle millions of customers. For example, CVS Pharmacy has millions of people using its applications on a regular basis. Therefore, we cannot expose that application to customers. We need to build a new client-facing application, but we cannot discard our existing application, which has been in our organization for many years. UiPath helps our applications communicate which improves our patient experience.

It helps our staff easily share data between systems by saving the information in Excel or CSV files and connecting the files to new applications.

We use UiPath to consolidate patient data from multiple sources into a single dashboard, which helps our doctors keep track of patient histories in one place.

The single dashboard helps our patients a lot because we save patient information in the same way for all hospitals including doctors, nurses, and medicines. This means that if we need a doctor nearby, want to change doctors, or are moving to a new city and need medical help, our data can help us find the right resources.

UiPath automation has helped our staff save time, especially for invoicing insurance policies in healthcare organizations. UiPath automation has saved millions of dollars and thousands of hours by simplifying the process in both the healthcare and telecommunications industries.

UiPath has streamlined tasks for our healthcare staff, especially data viewing, enabling them to focus on higher-value activities.

We use UiPath's AI and machine learning capabilities to understand documents. The machine learning process has significantly improved the accuracy of the bot's ability to read data from PDF files.

In 2019, UiPath introduced Computer Vision activities for Citrix applications. This was a major turning point for the company, and the functionality was very useful; I had not seen it in any other tools.

The OCR engine is a valuable feature. 

UiPath should lower its prices because many other RPA tools have reduced their prices, and Microsoft is a major competitor because it offers RPA services to its customers.

I have been using UiPath for over five years.

UiPath is generally stable, but there are bugs in UiPath Studio that require fixing or restarting the application.

UiPath is scalable.

The technical support is good.

Positive

I previously used Blue Prism automation, but at the time, the functionality was limited and there were not many features.

The initial deployment is straightforward. We have some design methods. The dispatcher will handle input, the performer will perform the tasks. All processes will be transactional: our first module will create the transaction, the second will execute it, and the third will generate a report.

We use the CI/CD pipeline to deploy our software. After the software passes UAT testing, we need approval from the technical team before deploying it to production.

The implementation was completed in-house.

UiPath is expensive. Automation Anywhere is much cheaper, and it does not have the same AI and machine learning capabilities or features. However, for some industry cases, such as document understanding and computer vision, these features are not required.

I evaluated Automation Anywhere, which was not mature at the time but is now. I also evaluated Power Automate, which has the best price of all RPA tools and is capturing a large market share due to Microsoft's bundles and integrations.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We have thousands of people across the organization using the automation.

UiPath itself doesn't require maintenance but the infrastructure does at times.

UiPath offers a 60 to 90 day trial of its features so that users can try the solution before buying. We can also negotiate with UiPath sales to ensure that we see a return on our automation investment within the first year.

My current retail organization uses UiPath for finance-related activities like invoice generation. We also use the solution for pulling documents from any stored devices for customers. We save customer files like licenses, invoices, and other tax-related documents in the box. If customers want to use such files for any purpose, we need to extract them from the box environment. A bot will check for that particular customer-specific file, download it, and save it in client-shared locations.

Transactional details regarding whether a customer has delayed an EMI or paid the EMI on time will be updated in the system. A bot we defined using UiPath will do it around the clock without any human effort.

The most valuable feature of UiPath is the complete queue system-based framework because it is robust for all clients. If something goes wrong, we can define how many retries we can do for a particular request. In the next attempt, it can be achieved in a proper way.

The end users can expect the results without any manual intervention. This framework is very user-friendly, convenient for the developers or system integrators, and satisfies the client compared to other frameworks.

I would like to see more clarity in the solution's AI functionality. I have not completely implemented AI for our client. I'm trying to understand the areas in which AI will be more usable for my client.

The OCR is the only area where I expect a little flexibility and improvement. If you try to extract scanned documents or photos using any native or Google OCR, you won't get 100% accuracy.

I have been using UiPath for more than five years.

UiPath is a stable solution.

UiPath is a scalable solution. UiPath is deployed in one location with around 5,000 end users using the solution.

I also have more than four years of experience with the Blue Prism tool.

The only major difference between UiPath and Blue Prism is that UiPath is deployed in the cloud, and now Blue Prism is trying to be deployed in the cloud. Other than that, I did not observe any differences between the two solutions. Both are good products in the market, and customers are happy with both solutions.

UiPath's initial setup is easy.

Around two people are needed for the solution's deployment and maintenance.

Our customers have seen a return on investment with UiPath and are happy with the licenses, pricing, etc. They haven't raised any concerns so far, and they're increasing the licenses based on the processes we are deploying.

I'm a system integrator and one of the lead developers of UiPath for the end customers.

I use UiPath in the banking and retail industry.

UiPath is deployed on the Oracle cloud.

I would recommend UiPath to other users. The users need to configure the environment in a better way. If an organization wants to utilize only four or six bots, it needs to plan ahead and consider how big it plans to grow in the next five years. Planning in advance would clarify how the organization needs to configure the environment and what challenges it needs to handle. That's a better way to start using UiPath as an RPA tool.

Even before the deployment, we gave an estimation to the end clients regarding what to expect after deploying the solution. We told them about the things they will be very comfortable with and the time interval they will take to know things. They are comfortable and 100% satisfied with the solution.

Overall, I rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We are using UiPath for traditional RPA automations at the moment. 

We are automating rule-based, repetitive business processes, but we're interested in the automation opportunities AI capabilities present. Of course, transactional automation has limitations, but in areas where it is applicable, we have been able to use it effectively.

The overall UiPath platform, including the Orchestrator, Studio, and the robots, is valuable. UiPath's competitors don't do orchestration as well.

The licensing policies and concepts change almost yearly, leading to difficult negotiations. All components are licensed differently, and it would be more straightforward to adopt new features if they were included in the same bundle.

I have used UiPath for six or seven years.

The solution is very stable for us.

It is scalable according to our needs.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath is customer-oriented and attends to the customers well. They're helpful when we have challenges and are open to our ideas. We've had challenges with technical support solving some tickets, but it's been excellent overall. 

Positive

We installed the on-premise version in our environment seven years ago. It was very straightforward at that time.

I was involved in the deployment process by overseeing it.

We have seen a significant return on investment. The easiest to measure is the hours saved from manual work. We've saved the equivalent of 200 FTEs worth of hours each year. There are also less measurable benefits, such as improved quality and faster throughput.

Our primary use case is IDP. We're in the Fed market, so a lot of it is all IDP driven. AI and automation are priorities. We're not exclusively a UiPath shop, but we're shifting to utilize it more because we know there are opportunities, especially in the realm of document capture.

For us, it requires fewer resources, and the time to get to the production environment is quicker. It hasn't significantly impacted our stakeholders yet, but people know the brand. When we talk with customers, they ask if we know about about UiPath and if we're a partner. 

We're moving away from the current platforms because they're less robust. The RPA tools we've used previously haven't kept up with the pace of change. UiPath is a leader that has continued to progress with RPA development and invest in improvements. 

We're still in the early stages with UiPath, but two things that will help are the Copilot and the Autopilot. We'll be able to generate new processes based on the learning that's taken place. It will have a significant impact on the things we do. Generative AI is not new to us. We've had these discussions for a while, and our CEO is well-versed in generative AI. Software companies are coming to realize the value and implement it. 

UiPath has spent the money on research and generating libraries. The out-of-the-box libraries are extensive. In the past, we used standard capture products, where we had to create all of the extractions in the zones and all those things. UiPath offers faster implementation. 

UiPath's pricing could be improved. The margins for us as a bottom-level tier partner are not great, which can be a hindrance, particularly when we present it to the customer. Other than that, I don't have any areas of improvement at the moment due to our limited experience. Maybe after six months to a year, we might have more feedback.

I have been using UiPath for several years, although I only started with this company a couple of months ago. Previously, I led a team for four years with another organization.

The stability of the solution has been good. I haven't experienced any platform issues. Any issues that arise typically relate to coding or interactions with third-party vendors.

Reflecting on my previous organization, UiPath was able to scale effectively.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. My previous experience with UiPath's customer service was really good. The support from the sales and presales levels and the technical specialists was excellent. They were all willing to help and work with us.

Positive

We eventually switched from our previous solution because it did not keep up with the pace of change. The company did not invest in their product and failed to keep up with the latest and greatest technologies.

It's too early to tell if there's been a return on investment with UiPath.

Pricing is a significant area for improvement. We see little margin as a bottom-level tier partner, which makes it challenging when communicating pricing to the customer.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We're still in the exploration and discovery phase. We're learning about UiPath's capabilities and how they fit into the overall picture. We haven't separated AI from our normal process at this point. I work in our company's contact center, and we engage them in many different ways. We talk to management about their problems, report large volumes of transactions, and work side-by-side with the agency to find trouble cases and where they frequently perform manual tasks.

UiPath has helped our customer success unit and various technical teams. We were trying to understand the industry's current state and the direction our peers are taking. We're not so focused on eliminating positions as we are on using UiPath to free staff to work on additional tasks. There are always new tasks in the contact centers, and if we don't need to add staff, we can redirect them to other areas.

We were looking at implementing most of the features. I don't look at it with a specific lens but try to understand where all the tools are and how they can best help us in each situation. I don't have a favorite tool but try to understand how to use each one in combination to give the utmost business value.

Being able to escalate quickly is not a strength for UiPath and may be a focus area.

My department has been using UiPath for about two months.

The people from UiPath, from customer success to various technical teams, have been very helpful. When we open tickets, they respond quickly and escalate to the appropriate teams.

Positive

We did have a different solution. Deploying the solution to our agents' desktops was essential, and UiPath's advancement in that space and innovation position was enticing.

The initial deployment was fine. We had an on-premise deployment and weren't using the Automation Suite. It didn't work for us at the time. There wasn't a lot of flexibility there. I understand that it's changed, but we've already deployed on-prem. We've grown, and the complexity is through the roof, so now we think it's worth transitioning to an alternative solution.  That part has not been great, but at least there are places for us to go.

UiPath is expensive compared to competitors. We're examining where the value comes in and their ability to continue being a leader to justify the cost.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We have multiple use cases, including banking and finance. We are primarily taking data from PDFs and manipulating it in Excel, but we also build some UI-related automations. 

UiPath has saved my team some time by streamlining our processes. Previously, it took nearly a month to complete the accounting processes, but we've reduced it to one week. Before we implemented UiPath, they were working day and night to complete the task, so it reduced the time by almost 90 percent. We're further refining the process to reduce the time to five or six days.

The solution has reduced human error, which also saves us some time because we don't need to go back and correct mistakes. It's almost 100 percent error-free. It saves us money from server costs when we automate processes because there are typically so many people working on the same task. It reduces payroll costs. 

The UiPath Academy offers multiple certificates, which is excellent because we're asked for certifications during our interviews and audits. We've completed most of the UiPath Academy course. There's a foundational certification, and UiPath offers additional courses when they launch a new feature. We can get a deeper understanding of that particular function. The best thing is that it's free, and anyone can access the academy courses. 

UiPath's interface is excellent and accessible to new developers. It's easier for beginners to learn, and the learning curve is shorter compared to other tools. If you know Python and any other programming language, writing custom scripts is simple. Other solutions like Robocop and Power Automate have less flexibility in the scripting languages you can use.

We can implement end-to-end automation in most cases because we can use a different language if we encounter any limitations. For example, in one of my projects, we had an issue extracting the data from a scanned document. After reading that scanned copy, it couldn't pull the correct number. We could clean the image using Python scripting, and recreate it so that the output was correct. If we reach a hurdle we can't get over, we can switch to a different scripting language. 

UiPath's community is another thing that sets it apart from other RPA tools. Whenever we get stuck on something, we can go to the community to see if others are facing the same issue. There are many queries in that forum. That's how my team often solves an issue. The forum will have the solution 90 percent of the time. It's a fantastic resource. 

UiPath could improve machine learning for its Document Understanding module. We have to train that model to pull the data from different digitized or non-digitized documents. The classification could be improved, but I'm not sure how they could make it better. 

Sometimes, we get an error when we are developing something in the UiPath Studio for Salesforce. It gives me an error when I create one line of code, but I don't get the error when I make the same line of code again. We also get some bugs when UiPath adds new features. If we're developing multiple activities on one core, it can slow the response times a bit, and it will take more time when we try to download the dependencies or other packages. 

If we're doing UI-related automation, updates to the website might remove a specific UI element, and it affects the code. That's a drawback to using UiPath for a website.

I have used UiPath for more than four years.

There are some performance issues during development. When we transfer a process from one machine to another using GitHub, it will work fine on my machine, but it will take time for the other developers to redownload the particular dependencies. It is not going to update immediately. 

I rate UiPath nine out of 10 for scalability. 

I rate UiPath support seven out of 10. Their frontline support agents don't know that much and often cannot recognize the issue. After contacting UiPath two or three times, they finally assigned us a technical person who could resolve the issue within twenty minutes. However, it took two or three days altogether. Our bot wasn't functioning for that entire time. 

Neutral

I have used other RPA tools, including Robocorp, Power Automate, and Automation Edge. UiPath is great for data manipulation. When we want to take values from tables like columns and rows, it's effortless because it's using the .NET language. I use Power Automate and Robocorp because some clients need to develop their processes with these tools. 

UiPath is better than the alternatives, but some of the other tools perform better. For example, if I have the same code in Robocorp and UiPath and run the processes at the same time, Robocorp will complete faster if we're only considering UI-related automation. In most use cases, it's the same, but Robocorp is a little bit faster when automating UI-related processes because it's directly selecting that particular UI element. 

If I want to click to the next page and process the data, it will be faster in Robocorp. In UiPath, it's easier to develop the code and configure the bot, but Robocorp is faster. 

Deploying UiPath is easy. Only one person is needed to install it. It takes around two or three hours to install and configure the solution because the file is larger We have to download UiPath Studio and other components

UiPath requires some maintenance. If the process involves a user interface, we need to adjust it when the website is updated and a UI element is changed. When that happens, we need to update the code that references that particular UI element.

UiPath is expensive compared to other solutions like AutomationEdge, which is cheap. Last year, it wasn't too high, but I believe they updated their licensing model, making it very costly.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. UiPath is an excellent tool, and you can get support quickly from UiPath. One thing I would note is that you can negotiate with UiPath for lower initial costs, but they will likely increase the price after you enroll. 

We use UiPath in various internal departments to automate our HR, financial, and IT operations, including access management and ISO compliance to control traffic.

We have UiPath deployed both on-premises and in the cloud.

Building automation with UiPath is easy. The solution is user-friendly, and we do not require technical knowledge or skills to use it. With a little training, we can start building automation with UiPath. Customer support is helpful if we get stuck at any step, and the dashboard is user-friendly and centralizes control in one place.

We use UiPath for multiple end-to-end processes.

The UiPath User Community is a good place to learn and get answers to questions we have related to UiPath.

The UiPath User Community edition is flexible and allows us to practice and learn for free before taking what we have learned to our enterprise edition of UiPath.

UiPath has improved our operational process efficiency, allowing us to schedule processes to run 24/7 and freeing our employees from repetitive tasks so they can focus on other work.

UiPath Academy courses are useful for our employees. We also have access to the enterprise learning portal, where materials are available.

UiPath has helped reduce human error. When all the prerequisites are met and the process is fully automated there is a zero percent chance for human error. For the processes that are not fully automated, UiPath was able to reduce human error by 60 to 80 percent.

Before UiPath we had one employee tied to one business process and after implementing UiPath we have one employee tied to multiple domains. Our staff now has time to work on other tasks.

The most valuable feature of UiPath is the ability to consume APIs directly from any application.

UiPath is expensive, and its cost could be reduced to make it more accessible to small and medium-sized businesses that could benefit from it. The orchestrator and licensing cost should be flexible instead of hard-coded licensing.

UiPath is limited to one application at a time and cannot process two applications simultaneously. This functionality could be improved to support dual browsing, making it more efficient.

I have been using UiPath for almost four years.

We have not experienced any crashes of UiPath. We have experienced some slowdowns three times this year, but this could be due to our internal network rather than UiPath.

The scalability is good. We can adjust our workflows according to the conditions with no issues.

Technical support is extremely helpful. We contact support whenever we need to upgrade our volumes, and by following their guidelines and prerequisites, we can easily complete the upgrade ourselves. Once the support team responds to our call they are quick to resolve our issue.

Positive

Before UiPath, we performed manual integrations, but the types of processes we could automate were limited. We faced challenges automating any process where humans needed to make decisions or where minor tweaking was required between the target and source applications. UiPath has removed these restrictions.

UiPath is easy to install, and its representatives are flexible in supporting our installation. Upgrading our libraries and maintaining UiPath security protocols is also easy, which makes the overall installation process straightforward.

Two people are enough for the deployment.

We implemented UiPath in-house.

UiPath is more expensive than other solutions on the market, such as Microsoft Power Automate.

The Flex license is around $11,000. It should cost at least half that price compared to other solutions. We must purchase an orchestrator for each platform, which is mandatory and adds to the cost. UiPath should consider this and offer a more economical license.

I give UiPath eight out of ten. The cost brings down the overall rating.

Maintenance is required when running UiPath on-premises for the server, OS, and DB. On a bi-weekly and quarterly basis. We also have to implement tools for the firewall.

I recommend UiPath for large-scale and multinational organizations because they can afford the licensing costs. Organizations should explore UiPath before embarking on a transformation journey, as transformation requires significantly more cost than automating existing legacy applications. UiPath is flexible and can integrate with all applications.