We performed a comparison between Camunda and MEGA HOPEX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Using the BPMN helps us to have a common shared communication language when discussing processes."
"The BPMN diagram is valuable. For our use case of transferring money from one account to another, the connections have to be done in the traditional financial ways. There are a lot of unexpected errors and a lot of instability with this kind of system, and we are using Camunda in order to have clear flows. With BPMN, I can show a flow to my business partner, and the business team can easily understand what's going on. The technical team can understand what the implementation is, and we can model different errors and the process for recovering from these errors."
"Being able to use a Java-based solution makes the product flexible."
"For an internal project, this is a solution that you can install and have up and running quite quickly."
"The headless nature of the Camunda Platform is something that has helped us to build our own logic and platforms on it."
"Camunda is a scalable product."
"We are using the BPMN engine of Camunda; we are not using the user interface. We are using just the engine, the back end of this. For us, it is working quite well."
"It has an open BPM"
"The ability to customize is valuable."
"Every module sets up the same information in a unique repository."
"What I find the most valuable is the process workflow. It is really good."
"You do not need to be a professional of enterprise modeling to contribute to the enrichment and improvement of the enterprise repository."
"We use the portfolio management feature heavily."
"The most valuable parts of this solution are the richness of its features and its easy interface."
"The initial setup was straightforward. With configuration, customizing or prepping the data and deployment, it took about one year to set up. We only needed two people to deploy and maintain the solution: one business architect and someone who specializes in customization and operations."
"The main feature I find crucial in MEGA HOPEX is the catalog view, which provides a comprehensive visualization of all artifacts in one repository. Another valuable aspect is the availability of out-of-the-box outcomes, such as strategy maps and BPA models, eliminating the need for additional configuration. MEGA HOPEX allows users to focus on specific business areas, like risk management or data governance, providing a high-level overview while enabling deep dives into specific areas of interest. For risk management, MEGA HOPEX allows users to assess impacts, create recovery plans, and track action plans."
"I have faced problems in bringing up the Cockpit in terms of GUI processes. I think that there is room for improvement in those areas."
"Documentation can be improved."
"In terms of features, it meets my needs, but I would like Camunda to have an office in Brazil and provide training in Portuguese. They should provide regional support and training courses in Portuguese."
"When you search for Camunda BPM resources or books on how to utilize Camunda BPM, it is lacking. When it comes to Alfresco, there are thousands of resources that can help you to utilize within AWS and its Group Services. I would like to see the usage of Camunda BPM on Amazon Web Services be improved."
"I would say that Camunda should actually focus on small cases as well. There's a lot of space out there, for small businesses. If they can, they should cater to them."
"The solution's pricing and scalability could be improved."
"When building interfaces, there are limited tools to work with, especially when dealing with different types of tasks, such as user tasks and system tasks."
"The primary issue regarding the Camuto platform is its high cost of training. This is why I haven't discussed it extensively, as compared to other products that are more affordable in terms of developer training."
"MEGA HOPEX can improve process simulation in the BPA module. If the solution was better we would not have to use another solution for this purpose. Simulating scenarios in the future for the to-be processes is in demand. If we can have the simulation engine built inside MEGA HOPEX, we would not have to purchase another license or solution to integrate them with each other. This would be a great improvement."
"We would like to see integration with other products, such as being able to use our workflow with SharePoint and Microsoft Office."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"The tool's UI should be more user-friendly."
"Lacking more out of the box integrations."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"MEGA HOPEX's initial setup could be easier. The newer version is better but they still need to improve the process. The deployment took approximately four to eight hours."
"It has a data domain where we load our data objects onto the tool but doesn't provide data governance capabilities such as cleansing or validating data."
Camunda is ranked 2nd in Business Process Design with 71 reviews while MEGA HOPEX is ranked 8th in Business Process Design with 37 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Interactive with good functionality and helps with productivity". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas MEGA HOPEX is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio and Lucidchart. See our Camunda vs. MEGA HOPEX report.
See our list of best Business Process Design vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.
