We performed a comparison between Appian and TIBCO ActiveMatrix 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."Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"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."
"Recently, we added Appian Process Mining, Appian Portals, and now Appian RPA."
"Rapid development with low-code makes it easier to quickly get apps implemented and the time to break-even and ROI is much faster."
"This is the most complete solution of its kind."
"The product's most valuable feature is the low code aspect of development. We can develop an end-to-end VPN solution using a single platform."
"Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions."
"Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product."
"For specific situations this can be a good solution and a simplified interface to work with."
"It is the best product because of its stability. ActiveMatrix 5.x is highly stable in production, and the downtime is very low. I have worked on a lot of service projects, and the engine is very stable, robust, and scalable. The development and change requests can be pushed quickly, and the mapper activity and SSLT kind of features are also good. It is easy to do changes, testing, and deployment. Its deployment is very easy, and we can automate a lot of scripts for our on-premises solution. I work for an investment bank, and we have automated a lot of processes for our customers. Previously, we used to develop scripts and tools. With version 6.x, everything is moved to Maven and other things. Environment handling is done mostly through DevOps tools. As compared to Mulesoft, the deployment and configuration are very easy in TIBCO."
"The scheduling and the calendar are very useful."
"The capacity for distributing the jobs in a workflow is an important feature."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"Native mobile capabilities or hybrid mobile app capabilities are very limited. Things like offline sync, offline storage, access to smartphone device features, etc. are not supported by the Appian platform yet."
"If we could calculate the amount of data that will be realized, it would help us a lot."
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"It is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"Form creation and SAIL proprietary language still basically require programming. The claim a BA type can do everything is hogwash."
"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."
"The scalability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The maintenance of the package could be improved."
"ActiveMatrix is in the middle field. MuleDB is more on the engineering side with Java and other things. SnapLogic is there are on the higher side with very low coding. TIBCO stays in the middle like IBM or Oracle. TIBCO can move towards IBM's way of doing. IBM has a big market and many varieties of products and good integration, which TIBCO doesn't have. It can have better integration. TIBCO's transition to the cloud is a little slow. As compared to Dell, Boomi, and Mulesoft. TIBCO took the steps a little later. TIBCO's ID was far better and easier to work with previously. TIBCO's 5.x ID was very good, and the development environment and the transition were easy. Version 6.5 onwards, it is a stable product, but it would be good if they can do something similar to version 5.4 with version 6. They should concentrate on this API market. It will give them the strength and the ability to grab the market back."
"The product is missing some means of addressing more complex BPM constructs and should interface with more platforms easily."
"Technical support needs to be streamlined."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is ranked 30th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 6 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM writes "A tool backed by stellar support that has helped me plan workflows easily". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems and Pega BPM, whereas TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is most compared with Camunda, TIBCO iProcess Suite, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and AWS Step Functions. See our Appian vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix 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.