We performed a comparison between FICO Blaze Advisor and PegaRULES based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Rules Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the IDE."
"FICO Blaze Advisor's most valuable features are the analytics, the code change is not required, and even a business analyst can do that change in the rules when we set it up."
"The solution is very stable."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that it has a fast engine for decisioning."
"The rules management application is the best feature because BAs or even, perhaps, a businessperson, can directly create rules, change rules, and deploy them to production directly."
"The solution is customizable, so you can create your own data items and variables to suit your needs."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the algorithm they use in the retail version. The execution there is very optimized - so even though we have a huge service with huge counter rules, we still get the results in milliseconds. That is something amazing I found about this tool."
"Case Management is the most valuable feature of PegaRULES, which is not found in other BPM tools."
"We can use the rules as per the class."
"The most valuable feature of the product is that it's very customer-centric. It's easy to use for a customer or a user. It's also easy for someone who is developing an application. You can develop different features in just one place. You don't have to go to different places."
"They're pretty easy to create, and they're pretty easy to deploy."
"Offers a unique environment where its entire architecture is very unified"
"The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment."
"getNext removes some of the managements overheads as well as inbuilt reporting."
"In certain circumstances, it can be fairly straightforward to execute and deploy new modifications."
"The developer's tools on their optimized version should be a little bit more user friendly. Additionally, it really doesn't pick up the actual exception or error of what the developers are getting."
"More online support such as a knowledge base should be available."
"FICO needs to provide a better user experience and user interface."
"FICO Blaze Advisor is still missing things for maintaining the version of something. For example, we have gates for programming, for storing, or scripts. In there, one developer can prepare a file or a piece of code or something, and another developer can work on the same code or on the same text file or something, and you can manage it. This is missing in FICO Blaze Advisor."
"I would like to see more help on the internet and more training over the internet. They only have a few blogs there, so that should be increased."
"Lacks notifications when code changes have been made."
"The initial setup of FICO Blaze Advisor was somewhat complex. The implementation took approximately three to four months. However, I left halfway through the process, I am not sure of the exact timeframe."
"PEGA claims that they provide a LOW-CODE-PLATFORM which is easy to use - even for "citizen developers" (i.e. business employees). If you really want to use all the features out of this platform, you definitely need a lot of experience and a lot of training."
"I've spent some hands-on time with the platform, and you can do those things, and it is all low code, but is it as easy as they make it sound? No. That's my two cents. For example, if I want to do something, there is no way to switch from low code. I just want to do a simple If-Then-Else rule, but I have to go through their low-code tool and do dragging and dropping. I'm a development person, and in my opinion, even some business users could do this easier. There is no way to go back and forth to an editor where I can just type in an If-Then-Else rule, which would be much faster than drawing in their low-code editor. They don't support that. They lead you too much."
"PegaRULES need to improve its JVM. It needs to enhance the operation speed and memory size."
"There is room for potential improvement in the performance of PegaRULES, as well as the need to address any existing security concerns. It should be noted that working with an older version of Pega, rather than the latest 8.x versions, may limit certain capabilities and leave room for vulnerabilities that could benefit from increased attention. Furthermore, the user interface (UI) could be a candidate for enhancements. It is worth mentioning that newer versions of Pega may have introduced improvements in these areas."
"User interface needs improvement."
"Implementation is a challenge due to the handling of the code"
"The UI has always been the weakest part."
"The usability of the solution for developers is sometimes difficult to work with because instead of fixing the existing bugs in the previous version, there is always a rush to push out a new version leaving the bugs in the old versions unresolved."
FICO Blaze Advisor is ranked 2nd in Business Rules Management with 8 reviews while PegaRULES is ranked 1st in Business Rules Management with 16 reviews. FICO Blaze Advisor is rated 8.2, while PegaRULES is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of FICO Blaze Advisor writes "The solution is stable and has the ability to extend the built-in logic, but is difficult to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PegaRULES writes "Seamless flows, high level capabilities, and straightforward installation". FICO Blaze Advisor is most compared with IBM Operational Decision Manager and Versata BRMS, whereas PegaRULES is most compared with IBM Operational Decision Manager and Versata BRMS. See our FICO Blaze Advisor vs. PegaRULES report.
See our list of best Business Rules Management vendors.
We monitor all Business Rules Management 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.