We performed a comparison between Appian and Tungsten TotalAgility based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Apache and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"The most valuable features of Appian are workflow management and the ease with which you can build the UI."
"Write to Data Store Entity - Saving data in SQL databases is done easily using entities. Entities (CDTs in Appian terminology) define relationships and target schema tables via XSD files."
"It's a stable product."
"Technical support is quite responsive."
"Low code development: Code can be developed pretty quickly which leads to less turnaround time for automation of business processes."
"The solution's most valuable features are the regular periodic and quarterly updates, they are very useful updates. They keep improving the solution more often, and that helps the platform or code always be up to date with the latest features."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Data extraction and auto-classification are great features."
"One feature I like is that it makes the matrix easy for an unstructured document."
"It's not so complex to design what you need to."
"The most valuable features of this solution are automation, ease of billing processes with the process net, and low to no code development."
"What I find most valuable in Kofax TotalAgility is its OCR feature. I also find its workflow and business process management capabilities valuable. Kofax TotalAgility also has good integration with other solutions and has an API call feature."
"Its integration capabilities are valuable. It has low code/no code features. You have to do minimal coding."
"Kofax TotalAgility is stable."
"It's a growing tool that offers a complete package of BPM, case management, and capture capabilities."
"The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well."
"If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"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."
"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."
"My only request is that they decrease the license costs."
"There should be more flexibility for the developers to choose the look and feel of the UI. They should have a better ability to design their widgets and customize them with different colors, shapes, and sizes. That is a limitation that could be improved upon."
"The solution could improve robotic process automation."
"It’s not truly low code yet, as every two or three projects, you will have a situation where you have to go behind the essential things. You will definitely still need to customize."
"The product's console version is old. It should also improve its forum."
"It would be nice if the tool has more connectors to different systems. It is an expensive solution."
"They provide sufficient but not excellent technical support. Perhaps there is a point where they could use some improvement."
"Lacks sufficient inbuilt features."
"Table line item extraction is not possible through Quick Capture."
"Room for improvement would be better OCR functionality in terms of Arabic OCR. There should be better accuracy."
"TotalAgility needs to improve communication with ECMs or other file storage systems because TotalAgility does not have file storage. A good improvement would be to create file storage or integrate with other file storage tools that are currently available."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 56 reviews while Tungsten TotalAgility is ranked 4th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 22 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Tungsten TotalAgility is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tungsten TotalAgility writes "Great with recognition and provides a high level of confidence in terms of extraction capabilities". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Tungsten TotalAgility is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, OpenText Intelligent Capture, UiPath Document Understanding, Hyland Brainware and Instabase.
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.