We performed a comparison between ABBYY Vantage and HyperScience based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The OTR (Optical Text Recognition) is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"Abbyy is really good in terms of reading OCR."
"The solution's technical support is very supportive."
"Identifies and extract relevant elements from a document."
"It's easy to use."
"It saves us a lot of manual work."
"We are able to extract details from a PDF and put them into a CSV. It is able to extract the details that we are looking for. We have the Machine Learning feature to extract the data with respect to the position of the field."
"Time-saving with increased levels of accuracy."
"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."
"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."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"The integration with UiPath is not good. I would like to see more documentation and guides to help gain more in-depth knowledge of how to use ABBYY FlexiCapture."
"I think that technical support should help instead of developing a solution from scratch every time you reach out to them."
"There are certain controls like radio buttons and checkboxes that when reading PDFs, really doesn't go well with the RPA."
"Programming interfaces should include intelligence or documentation."
"It could be more intuitive. It's huge and has many options, and that makes it difficult. You have to go to Google and search for documents and videos to try and understand how it works. Some tools or processes or some parts of the process should be intuitive to make it easier for the developers."
"They should improve the RESTful API side of this solution. Currently, fully RESTful API is not available in the on-prem version, which is really a problem, and we have to work around this limitation. The cloud version already has a fully RESTful API, but the on-prem version doesn't have a fully RESTful API, which is a big mistake. It is easy to solve, but they aren't solving it quicker. They are taking a long time. Nowadays, most people don't go to the interface. They like to use RESTful API."
"ABBYY's support model could be improved because we get some complaints from customers regarding the amount of time it takes and the kind of responses we get. They also need to improve their professional services team and train them to support customers better during custom implementations."
"One major area that requires improvement in ABBYY Vantage is its current JSON output format."
"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."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"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."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"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."
ABBYY Vantage is ranked 1st in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 46 reviews while HyperScience is ranked 6th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews. ABBYY Vantage is rated 8.0, while HyperScience is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ABBYY Vantage writes "Genius-level AI with very easy setup and implementation processes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". ABBYY Vantage is most compared with UiPath Document Understanding, UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Tungsten TotalAgility and OpenText Intelligent Capture, whereas HyperScience is most compared with UiPath, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate, Tungsten RPA and IBM Datacap. See our ABBYY Vantage vs. HyperScience report.
See our list of best Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) vendors and best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) 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.