We performed a comparison between Appian and BizFlow 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."The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"Even with an on-premise implementation, the scalability is still high, so it is easy to scale up."
"Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"The setup is easy."
"There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements."
"What I found most valuable in Appian is that it lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side. It's also low-code, yet it results in quick deliverables."
"Low code development: Code can be developed pretty quickly which leads to less turnaround time for automation of business processes."
"There are so many advantages. First things, like we have a seamless automation capability available here in BizFlow. Totally customizable, UI we can create, and the third-party integration is also achievable. Not with the in-built functionality, but with custom code and all, we can achieve that thing also."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"It is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"We would like to have more granular control for interface styling."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"Appian is easy to set up, but JBoss is complex. JBoss is the application server for running Appian."
"Nintex provided an in-built functionality. Like integration-related things, so many service types are available. You just have to configure it. So, such kinds of things decrease the timing of development. So, it is missing in Bizflow."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 56 reviews while BizFlow is ranked 29th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while BizFlow 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 BizFlow writes "Seamless automation for workflows, customizable and UI friendly". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas BizFlow is most compared with . See our Appian vs. BizFlow 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.