We performed a comparison between Appian and Mendix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rapid Application Development Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tech support is quite good."
"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."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"What I found most valuable in Appian is that it lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side. It's also low-code, yet it results in quick deliverables."
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"Appian helps you do a lot of things. It's easy to configure and build an application platform, and it offers a lot of features that you find in an RPA solution. It's flexible so you can reuse it for a variety of use cases."
"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."
"Mendix code and coding logic are very visual. It looks like a flow chart rather than lines of code. Rapid development is what drew us to Mendix."
"Suite allows you to easily and smoothly integrate with pretty much anything. It is also cloud-enabled. It provides a full Cloud Foundry-driven cloud environment with one-click deployment."
"There is a free version of the solution you can use."
"We find it intuitive and easy to use."
"What I found most valuable in Mendix is that it's very much suitable for mobile apps such as native Android or IOS supported mobile apps. The multiple features of the platform are very, very attractive and very popular. Mendix has technical features such as microflows and nanoflows. You can also access data models in the platform. These are the features that are very, very strong in Mendix. I got my hands dirty on other low-code platforms, but I have not seen such strong features in them compared to the microflows, nanoflows, and data model access that are in Mendix, including creating and integration. The platform has out-of-the-box adapters or out-of-the-box-connectors that you can integrate with different interface applications such as SAP, Salesforce, Oracle EBS, etc."
"The most valuable features of the product are its ease of use and speed. My friend and I find it helpful as a team of just two developers."
"I think that the workflow and automation features are quite good."
"The pricing is very clear, with no hidden fees."
"Occasionally, certain pre-made modules may not be necessary and customers may desire greater customization options. Instead of being limited to pre-designed features, they may prefer a more flexible version that allows for greater customization."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"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 is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"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."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"Lacks integration with other products."
"If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product."
"It could use a more comprehensive widget creation studio in the IDE."
"While the community is great, they need to work on making their direct technical support services better."
"There are not enough developers who are using Mendix. The knowledge base available online and in the market is not as rich as other competitors."
"I would also like to see automatic adjustment to the Java Heap, whenever an application load becomes too much for the application. It could also use hot database replication."
"I would like to see more documentation as well as how-to documents."
"There's no direct tech support."
"I struggle with solutions like Mendix in terms of creating enterprise solutions."
"It is expensive."
Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 58 reviews while Mendix is ranked 5th in Rapid Application Development Software with 48 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Mendix is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mendix writes "Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems and Salesforce Platform, whereas Mendix is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Oracle Application Express (APEX), ServiceNow and Salesforce Platform. See our Appian vs. Mendix report.
See our list of best Rapid Application Development Software vendors and best Low-Code Development Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Rapid Application Development Software 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.