We performed a comparison between CloverETL and Tungsten RPA based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Server features for scheduler: It is very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them. The interface is easy to use."
"Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility."
"Key features include wealth of pre-defined components; all components are customizable; descriptive logging, especially for error messages."
"No dependence on native language and ease of use."
"The features that we have found the most valuable are the integration of different third-party support and productivity services."
"The flexibility to use already-developed components is really good. You can use it for Excel-related operations and other things."
"Kofax RPA's best feature is its high success percentage in picking up information from documents, especially where the DPI is really low."
"The most valuable features are workflow and process automation."
"The OCR was quite stable and flexible."
"The most valuable feature of Kofax RPA is the simplicity of automating tasks."
"This is a stable platform and we did not encounter any big problems."
"Kofax handles UIs via the browser well. If it's not possible, they have other features like modeling screen scrapes, etc."
"Its documentation could be improved."
"Needs: easier automated failure recovery; more, and more intuitive auto-generated/filled-in code for components; easier/more automated sync between CloverETL Designer and CloverETL Server."
"Resource management: We typically run out of heap space, and even the allocation of high heap space does not seem to be enough."
"The product has some constraints and performance issues."
"The technical support must be improved."
"There is really nothing special about the capabilities of this product."
"The process discovery could be a bit better."
"Kofax RPA could improve web-based automation and there should be a choice of what browser we can use, such as Google Chrome, instead of an inbuilt browser from Kofax RPA. Additionally, Kofax RPA is missing an orchestrator that other solutions have, such as UiPath."
"We are on version 10.6, and the current version seems to be 11. Kofax is cycling the capabilities of the product very quickly. One of the difficulties has been to actually keep up with the capabilities as they've evolved. On the one hand, it is good that the product is getting better, but on the other hand, it is difficult to implement the best way with a product that is evolving constantly."
"It needs a free training portal for anybody on the internet to use so that they can get an idea of what the possibilities are."
"Kofax RPA's UI could be more user-friendly."
Earn 20 points
CloverETL is ranked 60th in Data Integration while Tungsten RPA is ranked 12th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 24 reviews. CloverETL is rated 7.0, while Tungsten RPA is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of CloverETL writes "Provides wealth of pre-defined, customizable components, and descriptive logging for errors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tungsten RPA writes "A stable product that provides end-to-end solutions for different business problems". CloverETL is most compared with SSIS, iWay Universal Adapter Framework and Talend Open Studio, whereas Tungsten RPA is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA) and Tungsten TotalAgility. See our CloverETL vs. Tungsten RPA report.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.