We performed a comparison between Camunda and OpenText Operations Orchestration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable product. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten."
"The flexibility is great."
"Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure. It is more elaborate."
"It is an absolutely stable solution."
"We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we are sharing it with our business users."
"The graphical interface is very beneficial."
"Ease of use and ability to streamline a process model."
"The solution is useful for small projects."
"It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both."
"It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options."
"The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization."
"The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself."
"When addressing a complex and extensive process, the domain it belongs to, be it banking, healthcare, or HR, requires widespread access."
"In the future, I would like to see better transactional integrity."
"Without a proper frontend, the business cannot effectively use the platform."
"The product does not have a dictionary."
"In the future, I would definitely like to see the process administration (migration, audit, tracking) and process evaluation (optimize) features added to the community edition."
"There are a few things that I'm missing. For instance, the user interface creator, which I know other systems have, like Aurea or Lombardi, which are IBM solutions. The interface creator, including the data model creator or some module which would allow the users who are not programmers or business consultants and who are not technically skilled in database and Java programming, to create data models and user interfaces."
"It lacks some preset features and configurations which would make it more plug-and-play for customers."
"The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases."
"There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues."
"The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high."
More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Camunda is ranked 1st in Process Automation with 71 reviews while OpenText Operations Orchestration is ranked 21st in Process Automation with 24 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while OpenText Operations Orchestration 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 OpenText Operations Orchestration writes "HP OO blows away the competition, but has its fair share of flaws". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas OpenText Operations Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Control-M, Microsoft System Center Orchestrator, BigFix and Appian. See our Camunda vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.