We performed a comparison between FlutterFlow and Mendix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Low-Code Development Platforms solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."FlutterFlow offers a lot, but one feature that really helps me is the debugging features that allow me to test everything on the spot. This is really helpful."
"The most valuable features of FlutterFlow are the integrations and workflows."
"The integrated security saves a lot of time, especially when it comes to setting up user-roles and security. Also, database updates work automatically. There is no need to write queries to update the database, once you make an update."
"Enables us to rapidly create a complex application. We are also able to customize features that stakeholders in the corporation want to see, something that could not be done with other software. Our workflows and processes have evolved and improved. The fast iterations allow us to be nimble, get feedback from users, and do rapid updates."
"The solution is stable."
"You can scale the solution."
"What I like best about Mendix is that it's leading the way for low-code, no-code platforms compared to other solutions in the market."
"There are free online learning and certifications if a user would like to learn more and better understand the solution."
"The initial setup is easy."
"We find it intuitive and easy to use."
"The UI components could be more standardized. Sometimes, for certain properties, I have to search more than I do with other platforms. With other platforms, once you know one, you know all. But with FlutterFlow, sometimes you have to look around for what you need."
"There is room for improvement in advanced functionality so it could cater to more complex app development needs."
"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."
"There needs to be an increase in the number of the UI components."
"While the community is great, they need to work on making their direct technical support services better."
"One area for improvement is its integration capabilities. Creating a pluggable widget or integrating it with other systems is challenging. In terms of features, it would be great to see advancements such as AI services and the integration of third-party services. Additionally, connecting external devices to the application requires multiple steps. Improving this will make it easier for the developers."
"Overall, integration with the enterprise ecosystem needs improvement."
"There should be more integration with engineering applications and tighter integration for user authentication, such as single sign-on, etc. They have some of that. It just could be stronger."
"You need experienced programmers and developers to understand this solution."
"Needs multiple database connections so an app can directly read/write data to/from multiple databases. This would enable easy splitting of big applications that have complex entity relationships."
FlutterFlow is ranked 18th in Low-Code Development Platforms with 2 reviews while Mendix is ranked 4th in Low-Code Development Platforms with 48 reviews. FlutterFlow is rated 8.6, while Mendix is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of FlutterFlow writes "Simplifies integrations, accelerates development timelines, and offers a good MVP". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mendix writes "Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability". FlutterFlow is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, whereas Mendix is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Oracle Application Express (APEX), Appian and ServiceNow. See our FlutterFlow vs. Mendix report.
See our list of best Low-Code Development Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Low-Code Development Platforms 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.