We performed a comparison between Camunda and Informatica Business Process Manager 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."Camunda's process diagram creation and deployment is very easy."
"The solution is useful for small projects."
"It is a scalable product. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten."
"The speed and execution of DMN was a big selling point for us. It's very good at conducting business processes that are easily modeled and presented in a way that's easy to understand."
"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."
"I love that Camunda is a very developer-friendly platform, and my customers have evaluated the pricing as reasonable."
"Ease of use and ability to streamline a process model."
"We have the ability to modify the product if we need to, and that comes in handy whenever we need to add new functionality and features."
"There isn't any human touch involved. It's just an automated business process to build different applications and talking to various APIs using the client's ecosystems. We then build new functionalities out of it."
"Informatica Business Process Manager is easy to use and learn."
"I know that there are two good features, APN and ServiceNow but we haven't explored all of its features yet."
"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."
"The business model could be easier to understand."
"They could provide more documentation regarding the integration of different programming languages."
"The cockpit features of the Camunda Platform can be improved to make it a bit more user-friendly, in terms of providing a bit more user experience for non-technical users. There could be some additional documentation added."
"The GUI needs to be improved, with more configuration options."
"The support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Especially when you use the open-source version, there are issues with performance."
"Community support is basically what I'm looking for. Other than that, it is okay for now."
"We haven't had many technical issues. We don't use all of the components of the tool that are more complex and error-prone."
"I need to have some insight into the tool's cloud capabilities."
Camunda is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 71 reviews while Informatica Business Process Manager is ranked 20th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while Informatica Business Process Manager is rated 8.6. 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 Informatica Business Process Manager writes "An easy-to-use solution for ETL purposes ". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas Informatica Business Process Manager is most compared with Apache Airflow and Oracle BPM. See our Camunda vs. Informatica Business Process Manager 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.