We performed a comparison between Appian 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."Even with an on-premise implementation, the scalability is still high, so it is easy to scale up."
"The setup is easy."
"Technical support has been amazing overall."
"What stands out are the speed of the product, the quick, easy development, and visual diagramming."
"The most valuable feature is business automation."
"Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions."
"We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features."
"It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"The integration capabilities have been very useful."
"It is a scalable product."
"I think the initial setup is fine."
"I find it useful to utilize LDAP query action to find out the status of a particular user."
"The solution helped us automate several processes we used to do manually."
"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 tool is really helpful in reducing a lot of manual work. Its drag and drop components help to create a workflow faster than SharePoint Workflow Designer."
"It has a lot of features for creating and managing workflows, as well as for integrating with other applications. Nintex offers features, particularly to ensure a user-friendly experience."
"A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose."
"I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once."
"The solution needs more features. For example, a way to connect to our viewing database, to record, and more interface and component design."
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"We'd like to have integration with SharePoint."
"Bring all features available from the on-premise product into the cloud version and the workflow error reporting."
"The interface could be better and more language support is needed in the development environment or in the solutions platform in general."
"We would like to have access to an on-premises solution. In our country, we have a relationship with Central Bank of Egypt, which do noes not allow cloud solutions to be used. They should offer an on-prem solution with a flexible price license."
"User interface could use some improvement. Perhaps integration with Visual Studio or SharePoint Designer would be useful."
"At times, issues arise in certain scenarios. In such cases, the versioning can become quite difficult. There may be no other way but to restart the entire process or rectify it at that point."
"Currently, a notable challenge lies in the alignment of user experiences across the eight or nine applications within the suite. Transitioning between applications can be somewhat cumbersome due to varying user interfaces. However, the provider is actively addressing this concern by consistently rolling out updates every four to five months, aimed at harmonizing and streamlining the interfaces. This ongoing effort is expected to enhance the user experience over time. In terms of functionality and features, the platform stands out, offering flexibility with the option for both on-premises and cloud deployment. This flexibility extends to the RPA tool, providing clients with choices tailored to their preferences. An advantage lies in the shared security and data infrastructure across the toolset, facilitating smooth data transfer between applications. This contrasts with experiences with Oracle, where data transfer may involve complexities such as the need for intermediary file formats like TXL or SCZ."
"Converting a document from PDF to MS Word, or vice versa, needs to be improved."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while Nintex Process Platform is ranked 9th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 21 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Nintex Process Platform is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nintex Process Platform writes "Offers good integration capabilities and easy to learn and good stability". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems and Pega BPM, whereas Nintex Process Platform is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Pega BPM, Bizagi and SAP Signavio Process Manager. See our Appian vs. Nintex Process Platform report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors and best Process Automation 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.
