We performed a comparison between ABBYY Vantage and HyperScience based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of ABBYY FlexiCapture is the ability to create your own template on the fly. You can train and classify, you can work with those different templates without the need to do special programming for it or with minimum programming. Additionally, the solution is supporting the Arabic OCR, both of these combined features are the most important for us in the Egyptian market."
"The solution's technical support is very supportive."
"The OTR (Optical Text Recognition) is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"Its ease of use is valuable. It is easy to use and configure."
"The initial setup is not difficult. The vendor provides technical documents to assist with deployment."
"Verification Station is valuable."
"It's easy to use."
"ABBYY Vantage is user-friendly...The deployment process can be done in a few minutes."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"The generic models have a lot of areas to improve. In our experience, we are not able to get good results in the generic models. From a developer's point of view, there could be more improvement if the source code is available on a broader scope"
"This solution could be improved by offering better integration with other platforms."
"It could be more intuitive. It's huge and has many options, and that makes it difficult. You have to go to Google and search for documents and videos to try and understand how it works. Some tools or processes or some parts of the process should be intuitive to make it easier for the developers."
"Could be simplified, particularly the UI."
"We would like the workflow building within this solution to be more transparent, which would allow us to model the process."
"Machine learning needs to be improved."
"The is a long time between application updates."
"The system does not always train itself to recognize data properly."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
ABBYY Vantage is ranked 1st in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 46 reviews while HyperScience is ranked 6th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews. ABBYY Vantage is rated 8.0, while HyperScience is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ABBYY Vantage writes "Genius-level AI with very easy setup and implementation processes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". ABBYY Vantage is most compared with UiPath Document Understanding, UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Tungsten TotalAgility and OpenText Intelligent Capture, whereas HyperScience is most compared with UiPath, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate, Tungsten RPA and OpenText Intelligent Capture. See our ABBYY Vantage vs. HyperScience report.
See our list of best Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) vendors and best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) 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.