We performed a comparison between Appian and Tungsten TotalAgility based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Apache, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."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 solution has a lot of strong features for the financial industry, it is very easy to use."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"With low-code, we don't need a lot of coding, and then from the plumbing perspective, there is a complete CI/CD pipeline that exists within Appian that can be leveraged for open deployment."
"Appian is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster."
"Write to Data Store Entity - Saving data in SQL databases is done easily using entities. Entities (CDTs in Appian terminology) define relationships and target schema tables via XSD files."
"Appian is a very low code platform. It's very easy to learn and use."
"Essentially, Kofax TotalAgility as a whole is quite nice. As of now, we've only been able to use and explore its document classification and extraction capabilities. We haven't explored and used the case management capability yet, but the scan and capture capabilities we've been using heavily and those are quite good. Our solutions are mainly around those areas of Kofax TotalAgility. We haven't explored the product a lot, but the capabilities we've explored are good."
"Kofax TotalAgility is a single package. They provide you with OCR capabilities, BPM capabilities, and case manager features."
"The tool is low code which saves you from a developer."
"Kofax is very easy to use, UI-friendly and allows easy data extraction."
"Now it has an OCR, optical character recognition, engine where it can extract data from the document."
"It is user-friendly and has good documentation. It's good for developing communication and has a lot of the APIs needed for this purpose. There aren't a lot of software options available from this time period; this is the only one from 2013 that has this concept of microservices."
"It's a growing tool that offers a complete package of BPM, case management, and capture capabilities."
"One feature I like is that it makes the matrix easy for an unstructured document."
"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."
"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."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"It would be nice if you could create your own customized apps when the business needed them."
"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."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The one thing I would like to see more of right now: is a simplified form creation. That would be the most significant improvement I would like to see in their product."
"Lacks sufficient inbuilt features."
"Room for improvement would be better OCR functionality in terms of Arabic OCR. There should be better accuracy."
"They provide sufficient but not excellent technical support. Perhaps there is a point where they could use some improvement."
"Sometimes there isn't enough accuracy when it comes to extracts."
"It’s not truly low code yet, as every two or three projects, you will have a situation where you have to go behind the essential things. You will definitely still need to customize."
"Kofax should improve its handwritten extractions."
"TotalAgility needs to improve communication with ECMs or other file storage systems because TotalAgility does not have file storage. A good improvement would be to create file storage or integrate with other file storage tools that are currently available."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while Tungsten TotalAgility is ranked 4th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 22 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Tungsten TotalAgility 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 Tungsten TotalAgility writes "Great with recognition and provides a high level of confidence in terms of extraction capabilities". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Tungsten TotalAgility is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, OpenText Intelligent Capture, UiPath Document Understanding, Tungsten RPA and Camunda.
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.