We performed a comparison between Appian and Camunda Platform based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Appian has an edge over Camunda Platform in this comparison. It is easier to deploy and has better customer support.
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"The initial setup was seamless. We didn't run into any hardships at all."
"In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"The most valuable features of Appian are the VPN engine, it is fast, lightweight, and easy to set up business rules. Business teams can do it by themselves. That is a very good feature."
"The most valuable features of Appian are workflow management and the ease with which you can build the UI."
"It has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"The setup is easy."
"It is quite easy to build a simple process without any knowledge of programming."
"The product has a good task management engine."
"The solution is easily compatible with HTML forms and HTML language programming and that is the most significant part."
"The ease with which I can define workflows is most valuable. The latest updates and flexibility that it provides around a task activity are interesting for me."
"It has an open BPM"
"It is very user-friendly compared to IBM BPM. It's much simpler – it's more streamlined. That means even non-technical departments can use it."
"One valuable feature of the solution is its flexibility."
"For an internal project, this is a solution that you can install and have up and running quite quickly."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"Native mobile capabilities or hybrid mobile app capabilities are very limited. Things like offline sync, offline storage, access to smartphone device features, etc. are not supported by the Appian platform yet."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"It would be nice if you could create your own customized apps when the business needed them."
"The solution's pricing and scalability could be improved."
"The only drawback is the time that it takes to have a complete set of workflows implemented on the Camunda platform."
"The user interface needs some polishing because it is too technical for end-users to use it."
"It would be helpful to have more readily available use cases on the internet. Camunda's documentation feels less comprehensive."
"We're trying to put the people from the business to do it. We are using APIs, and we have open APIs to define our APIs and the request-response that each call requires and sends. So, to base the mapping on that, there was nothing to help. I know that with some tools, such as Oracle tools, you can see the input and expected output. With drag and drop, you can take one property from the left and drag it to the right, and it does all the mapping itself, but that's not the case with Camunda. So, for me, this is something that can be improved."
"I would say that Camunda should actually focus on small cases as well. There's a lot of space out there, for small businesses. If they can, they should cater to them."
"They could provide more documentation regarding the integration of different programming languages."
"The initial set up could be simplified, it's complex."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while Camunda is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 71 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Camunda is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, ServiceNow, OutSystems, Pega BPM and Mendix, whereas Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Bonita. See our Appian vs. Camunda report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors and best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.