We performed a comparison between Appian and Pega BPM based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Appian comes out ahead in this comparison. Pega BPM users say it is not robust enough. In contrast, Appian is a high-performing, reliable product.
"Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product."
"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."
"There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements."
"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."
"This is the most complete solution of its kind."
"The Application Designer is very user friendly. There are also lot of plug-ins that you can use and, for the most part, they are free."
"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions."
"Pega BPM's most valuable features are case management, integration, the convenience of using REST APIs, and the ease of changing things at the UI level."
"Application development is very rapid. A lot of code gets reused while building the applications, which is something we highly appreciate."
"The ability to define processes, build reports, and get insights or analytics on data is most valuable. It is a powerful platform."
"It is quite configurable, which is the most exciting feature. We can easily configure it as per our needs."
"Decreased time for plane departures and landing, supported analytical insight for planning of three to six month forecasting, and helped with operational decision planning and support."
"The most valuable feature of Pega BPMI would be the academy courses, specifically the Product Development Network (PDN). Additionally, our organization has a dedicated Customer Engagement Team that we work closely with to achieve our goals."
"Can do a lot of things with minimum time and cost."
"The solution offers excellent workflows."
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well."
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"It is difficult to set up the on-premise version."
"Appian could be improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with free-built process packs."
"The solution could use some more tutorials to help brand new users figure out how to use the product effectively."
"One of the areas of this solution that could be improved would be to advance the low code features of the application itself. We would also like to use the same platform to build any application, even if it is not necessarily defined as a functionality needed by a BPM."
"There have been some performance scalability issues. Suppose you want to add more users. You go from, say, 800 users to 1,500 users, and sometimes that creates issues for which there is no clear explanation. To fix it you have to escalate it with customer service and sometimes the response is not up to the mark in resolving those issues."
"Pega currently is trying to add chatbots to their systems, and it's still quite immature. This part definitely needs to be improved."
"Pega BPM could be improved by including token-based authentication and extending its integration options."
"I believe they simplify the application development. It is still complex. The learning is not easy, it takes time compared to other products on the market."
"The solution's pricing model or licensing model could be a little better."
"It should have integration with non-relational databases. A lot of databases are non-relational, and as a company, we are planning to move to NoSQL or open-source databases. It would be good if we are able to install and use Pega on a NoSQL database. They can also try to tailor or organize the company a bit differently and go more towards the microservice concept. I would like Pega to develop machine learning and intelligent AI algorithms. They have a good foundation in terms of the model and the stuff that we are using for some customers, and it will be good to onboard as many machine learning algorithms as possible."
"Sometimes when we are patching some data from the database, we are getting added as a timeout."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while Pega BPM is ranked 3rd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Pega BPM 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 Pega BPM writes "Provides built-in frameworks that can be reused and reduces time and cost". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems and Mendix, whereas Pega BPM is most compared with ServiceNow, Camunda, IBM BPM, Microsoft Power Apps and OutSystems. See our Appian vs. Pega BPM report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors, best Process Automation vendors, and best Rapid Application Development Software 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.