We performed a comparison between HyperScience and UiPath based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"The features that are most valuable are Excel Automation, Web Automation, Web Scrapping, and CV Automation."
"There are a number of activities available in the UiPath Studio, which are enough to automate all types of tasks."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the training that is available."
"With UiPath, development is easy because they have their own Studio. We just run UiPath Studio, drag and drop the components that we require, and connect all the dots. When we're doing website automation or web app automation, we can use their UI-based Studio and grab the elements from the web application using XPath, which makes the development easier."
"The most valuable aspect is its ease of use."
"There is a feature called Build a New App in UiPath. I found that to be very good. It makes our job much easier to know how to build applications. There is also the Studio module. I am from a non-technical background. So, for me, designing and creating applications was very tough initially, but with the Studio module and the activity tab that they have, it's easy. Most of it is just drag and drop. I found that very valuable."
"Positive factors include ease of development, ease of maintenance, robust security, and a very good installed client base."
"It offers me various benefits such as AI capabilities and works very well for me on all types of processes. It makes our tasks easy and provides accurate results."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"If there was a little more flexibility with the selectors, and they were a little bit more adaptive, I think it would be helpful."
"They need to work on security."
"If you don't change the name of the activity manually then you will lose some information during logging. It would be useful to put a simple incremental ID on each activity, so even if you don't change the activity name, you will know where the process becomes stuck."
"UiPath should offer an on-demand cloud-type model where you can get bots for five minutes, ten minutes, an hour, or whatever duration you need."
"I would like to see more machine learning features and capabilities for more accurate OCR."
"The solution needs to offer more integrations."
"I rate UiPath support six out of 10. It's primarily an email-based model. Sometimes we have questions, and it takes days for them to respond and sort our issue out."
"The only concern is it's a bit tough to understand the first time, and you have to invest in the technical improvement of your team in general."
HyperScience is ranked 6th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews while UiPath is ranked 1st in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 763 reviews. HyperScience is rated 7.6, while UiPath is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath writes "Facilitates end-to-end automation, has good AI and document understanding capabilities, and saves us costs previously spent on manual tasks". HyperScience is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate, Tungsten RPA and IBM Datacap, whereas UiPath is most compared with Microsoft Power Automate, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA), Robocorp and Fortra's Automate. See our HyperScience vs. UiPath report.
See our list of best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) 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.