We performed a comparison between AgilePoint and Nintex Process Platform 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."AgilePoint has improved our organization by making form implementation easier and to plan for future growth."
"The solution's workflows are its most useful feature."
"The initial setup of AgilePoint was very easy."
"I like the design and the integration capacity. It's also easy to use."
"AgilePoint's most valuable feature is process management."
"We were able to meet all of the requirements for functionality that were specified, and we did not experience challenges where we had to compromise on functionality."
"This solution is very easy to use and customize, using almost zero coding. It's built on SharePoint which many companies in our country have experience with. This made it easy to adapt the application in our environment."
"NWC forms could be better. Also, the ability to build workflows that are not dependent on SharePoint is very desirable. The forms feature just isn’t as functional as the forms for SharePoint."
"Easily maintained and customization is quite simple."
"It's easy to learn. However, there is very little content available for the Nintex also, but they are providing their own documentation and all. So, it's easy to learn also."
"I find it useful to utilize LDAP query action to find out the status of a particular user."
"It is very easy to use."
"The SharePoint feature is a really good connection, there are many features that are good."
"While the platform is good and it has a lot of options, I would like to see more alternative features in future versions such as connectors to IDM. Currently, they have only ADFS and Okta."
"It could be more flexible, but it's already a good solution for the designer."
"They should add more information about functionality."
"Some issues with AgilePoint's design, AI and UX are some of the major problems we deal with when handling our company's business models or processes."
"The solution should be able to support Docker. This would help make scalability easier."
"Hawkeye is emerging as a reporting solution, but as a V1 product it’s not very useful yet."
"It is very flexible because you can design your own main forms, but if there were some templates according to your market, it would be more useful for a new customer. That would make K2 more user friendly and easier to use."
"We would like to design parallel workflows and long-running workflows, along with new features for connecting to cloud-based systems."
"Difficult to include external partners with the solution deployed on-premise."
"We'd like to have integration with SharePoint."
"The security features for this solution need to be improved."
"It's very tedious to manage."
"Built-in reporting on-prem is limited and clunky at best."
AgilePoint is ranked 32nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 5 reviews while Nintex Process Platform is ranked 9th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 21 reviews. AgilePoint is rated 8.0, while Nintex Process Platform is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AgilePoint writes " An affordable tool to create workflows requiring an easy initial setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nintex Process Platform writes "Offers good integration capabilities and easy to learn and good stability". AgilePoint is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Mendix, OutSystems, Camunda and ServiceNow Now Platform, whereas Nintex Process Platform is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Appian, Pega BPM and ServiceNow Orchestration. See our AgilePoint vs. Nintex Process Platform 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.
