We performed a comparison between Apache Airflow and IBM BPM 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 product integrates well with other pipelines and solutions."
"Since it's widely adopted by the community, Apache Airflow is a user-friendly solution."
"It's stable."
"The UI is very simple and easy to learn."
"I found the following features very useful: DAG - Workload management and orchestration of tasks using."
"The product is stable."
"The tool is user-friendly."
"The reason we went with Airflow is its DAG presentation, that shows the relationships among everything. It's more of a configuration-driven workflow."
"We like that it does not require a lot of hours to train our people."
"I think the best way it can be it improved, is to make it easier to install. It's a very complicated piece of software, and there are a lot of things you have to do to get it set up. It's not just running an installer. You install WebSphere. You install the BPM product, and there's a large host of other steps you have to do: run queries against the database, you have to manually configure a bunch of properties files for your environment. I think if they could streamline all that, so it wasn't a considerable effort to install, that would be very useful. Because from an engineering point of view, you want to spend as little time as possible actually installing a product."
"The installation was straightforward."
"IBM BPM is stable."
"Agility is the key. It gives our customers a faster way to be able to implement processes, get ownership of task, visibility into a process. The ability to modify that process, optimize that process over time, is probably the biggest benefit that they get from the software."
"Its Analytics is the most valuable feature."
"The process creation."
"It is transparent to business users because it is mostly picture based modelling."
"We cannot run real-time jobs in the solution."
"The automation capabilities could be improved; a visual workflow designer and a graphical tool to reduce coding would be very helpful. But for now, it's sufficient for our simple workflows."
"There is a need for more features on experimental evolution steps."
"Programmatically, it's very good, and it doesn't have any competitors, but you cannot develop anything in Airflow UI. You need to develop everything within the program. In the market, other tools have come up recently as competitors to Airflow, and they also give graphical programming options, whereas Airflow doesn't provide that feature currently. All the DAGs you want to build need to be coded in Python."
"We have faced scenarios where Apache Airflow becomes non-responsive, leading to job failures. To resolve such situations, we had to manually reboot Apache Airflow since it doesn't provide an option to restart within the application. This necessitated modifying some configurations to initiate a restart of all Apache Airflow components. Although Apache Airflow is generally dependable, it may occasionally encounter glitches that can disrupt production flows and batches."
"For admins, there should be improved logging capabilities because Apache Airflow does have logging, but it's limited to some database data."
"There is an area for improvement in onboarding new people. They should make it simple for newcomers. Else, we have to put a senior engineer to operate it."
"The scalability of the solution itself is not as we expected. Being on the cloud, it should be easy to scale, however, it's not."
"All our clients are changing to microservice and cloud service. However, BPM does not have a solution for microservice and cloud service."
"The tool's workflow function is very strong."
"Stability wavers. We have some opportunities for improvement in this space, especially as we approach our target volume of a million transactions a day. It is tough, because it is not necessarily the product. It is more around the platform and infrastructure to support it, so the connectivity to the database, web sessions, and reverse proxies in front of that."
"Integration with web services, especially in the standard version of the product."
"I would like to see a lot more case studies."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"The solution can improve integration with SAP, CRM, and Salesforce, which is not capital-intensive."
"There are a few areas, like triggering mechanisms, externally exposed variables, and changing its values."
Apache Airflow is ranked 2nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 31 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews. Apache Airflow is rated 8.0, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Apache Airflow writes "Enable seamless integration with various connectivity and integrated services, including BigQuery and Python operators ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". Apache Airflow is most compared with Camunda, Informatica Cloud API and App Integration, IBM Business Automation Workflow, AWS Step Functions and Bizagi, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and AWS Step Functions. See our Apache Airflow vs. IBM BPM 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.