We performed a comparison between Camunda and TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The BPMN diagram is valuable. For our use case of transferring money from one account to another, the connections have to be done in the traditional financial ways. There are a lot of unexpected errors and a lot of instability with this kind of system, and we are using Camunda in order to have clear flows. With BPMN, I can show a flow to my business partner, and the business team can easily understand what's going on. The technical team can understand what the implementation is, and we can model different errors and the process for recovering from these errors."
"Camunda's process diagram creation and deployment is very easy."
"I think that the positives of Camunda Platform are that our customers can start with the free version. I think it is the most important."
"It has an open BPM"
"When I compare it with other BPM tools, like IBM, it is great, open source, and free when you use the community version."
"Camunda's most valuable feature is its ability to integrate with different products."
"One reason we selected Camunda or Cloud/DB is that it comes with the support of the BPMN notation, which helps to define processes in a standard manner. Another reason was that Camunda Cloud, as the name says, is designed for a new cloud era."
"The most valuable features are the management of internal processes, the ability to execute from design and the model for internal processes, the ability to make processes visible, and the ability to have information about the current state of each instance."
"It is the best product because of its stability. ActiveMatrix 5.x is highly stable in production, and the downtime is very low. I have worked on a lot of service projects, and the engine is very stable, robust, and scalable. The development and change requests can be pushed quickly, and the mapper activity and SSLT kind of features are also good. It is easy to do changes, testing, and deployment. Its deployment is very easy, and we can automate a lot of scripts for our on-premises solution. I work for an investment bank, and we have automated a lot of processes for our customers. Previously, we used to develop scripts and tools. With version 6.x, everything is moved to Maven and other things. Environment handling is done mostly through DevOps tools. As compared to Mulesoft, the deployment and configuration are very easy in TIBCO."
"The capacity for distributing the jobs in a workflow is an important feature."
"For specific situations this can be a good solution and a simplified interface to work with."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"The scheduling and the calendar are very useful."
"The support definitely can be improved. Apart from that, the language should be extendable to other platforms. If I want to write, I'll run a different platform, like Python code on top of it, or COBOL code on top of it, and it should support those languages."
"It would be helpful to have more readily available use cases on the internet. Camunda's documentation feels less comprehensive."
"In the future, I would like to see better transactional integrity."
"When you search for Camunda BPM resources or books on how to utilize Camunda BPM, it is lacking. When it comes to Alfresco, there are thousands of resources that can help you to utilize within AWS and its Group Services. I would like to see the usage of Camunda BPM on Amazon Web Services be improved."
"Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved."
"The migration strategy needs to be improved."
"The solution's pricing and scalability could be improved."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"The product is missing some means of addressing more complex BPM constructs and should interface with more platforms easily."
"The maintenance of the package could be improved."
"ActiveMatrix is in the middle field. MuleDB is more on the engineering side with Java and other things. SnapLogic is there are on the higher side with very low coding. TIBCO stays in the middle like IBM or Oracle. TIBCO can move towards IBM's way of doing. IBM has a big market and many varieties of products and good integration, which TIBCO doesn't have. It can have better integration. TIBCO's transition to the cloud is a little slow. As compared to Dell, Boomi, and Mulesoft. TIBCO took the steps a little later. TIBCO's ID was far better and easier to work with previously. TIBCO's 5.x ID was very good, and the development environment and the transition were easy. Version 6.5 onwards, it is a stable product, but it would be good if they can do something similar to version 5.4 with version 6. They should concentrate on this API market. It will give them the strength and the ability to grab the market back."
"Technical support needs to be streamlined."
"The scalability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
Camunda is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 69 reviews while TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is ranked 31st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 6 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM writes "A tool backed by stellar support that has helped me plan workflows easily". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is most compared with Pega BPM, TIBCO iProcess Suite, IBM BPM, AWS Step Functions and Appian. See our Camunda vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) 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.