We performed a comparison between Camunda and OpenText MBPM 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."We like the idea of working with Cawemo because it enables us to keep on working, remotely or not. It allows us to collaborate between areas. It's easy to model and easy to use"
"The most valuable feature is that, with a visual system, you can try to have a process client before beginning the programming for the application."
"The UI is very user-friendly compared to other products. The native, vanilla UI is very interesting and intuitive to use. It's user-friendly when it comes to modernizing a business process."
"The most valuable features are that it's lightweight, can be embedded in existing Java code, and keeps track of the workflow state and the instances that we need."
"The flexibility is great."
"Camunda is a scalable product."
"The best feature is the automation."
"The Camunda BPMN Platform is very flexible and gives several options to deploy and scale it."
"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."
"Collaborations and process documentation in Camunda Platform are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"If they could build some scripts or some configuration to get it up and running in a Docker environment, that would be good. I didn't find anything when on Docker, however, maybe they have something and I didn't see it yet."
"The user interface needs some polishing because it is too technical for end-users to use it."
"While it's very scalable, it would be great if auto-scaling capabilities were added to it... one area that really could help out would be to have dynamic resizing of the cluster. Right now, you have to do capacity planning."
"The support definitely can be improved. Apart from that, the language should be extendable to other platforms. If I want to write, I'll run a different platform, like Python code on top of it, or COBOL code on top of it, and it should support those languages."
"The documentation could use improvement."
"The product does not have a dictionary."
"Community support is basically what I'm looking for. Other than that, it is okay for now."
"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."
"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."
Camunda is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 71 reviews while OpenText MBPM is ranked 41st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while OpenText MBPM is rated 7.0. 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 OpenText MBPM writes " A solution offering good automation capabilities while needing to improve its support and documentation". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas OpenText MBPM is most compared with webMethods Integration Server. See our Camunda vs. OpenText MBPM 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.
