We performed a comparison between Appian and ProcessMaker 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."It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"Appian has many valuable features, the first being the ease of development—rapid development. Second, the process of learning the product and tool is faster when compared to its peers in the market. It's closer to low-code, and while it's still not very easy, it's more low-code than other products in the industry. Appian has a good user interface, a seamless model user interface, which comes without additional coding. It can also integrate with multiple systems."
"Process Modeling enables creation of business process workflows. You can create complex business workflows in a visual manner, and it is also easy to debug/monitor."
"Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"What stands out are the speed of the product, the quick, easy development, and visual diagramming."
"Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"The initial setup was seamless. We didn't run into any hardships at all."
"There is no need to worry about vulnerabilities in the system, because Appian built a secure system."
"Its performance, stability, and security are fine."
"What I like most is the seamlessness of the workflow capabilities."
"The documentation needs to 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.)"
"Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built."
"If we could calculate the amount of data that will be realized, it would help us a lot."
"Appian has a few areas for improvement, which my organization raised with the Appian team. One is the Excel output which is limited to fifty columns when it should be up to two hundred or three hundred columns."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"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."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"This solution only supports basic text, but we would like to be able to insert components such as rich text, graphs, charts, pictures, and other objects."
"Its interface should be a bit more user-friendly."
Earn 20 points
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while ProcessMaker is ranked 37th in Business Process Management (BPM). Appian is rated 8.4, while ProcessMaker is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ProcessMaker writes "Easy to learn, automates our manual processes to make things easier, and saves us time and money". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas ProcessMaker is most compared with Camunda, Apache Airflow and Bonita. See our Appian vs. ProcessMaker 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.