We performed a comparison between Apache Airflow and Camunda Platform based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Camunda Platform has an edge over Apache Airflow in this comparison. It is easier to deploy and is scalable and robust. However, Apache Airflow users are overall more satisfied with the pricing of the product.
"Apache Airflow is easy to use and can monitor task execution easily. For instance, when performing setup tasks, you can conveniently view the logs without delving into the job details."
"The user interface for monitoring and managing workflows has been excellent, particularly in the latest version. c"
"Apache Airflow is useful for workflow automation, making it capable of automating pipelines, data pipelines, and data warehouse processes."
"The solution's UI allows me to collect all the information and see the code lines."
"The solution is flexible for all programming languages for all frameworks."
"The best feature is the customization."
"The UI is very simple and easy to learn."
"Its user-friendly interface makes it straightforward to operate, offering a plethora of features for data preparation, buffering, and format conversion."
"I love that Camunda is a very developer-friendly platform, and my customers have evaluated the pricing as reasonable."
", Camunda can be a powerful tool to work with when used in an optimized and well-implemented manner."
"The product is stable."
"It's user friendly, much better than most tools I have seen."
"The most valuable features are the workflow, the task list, and the modeler where we use VPN."
"Camunda Platform has a very good interface for workflow and business process design."
"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."
"The most valuable features are the management of internal processes, the ability to execute from design and the model for internal processes, the ability to make processes visible, and the ability to have information about the current state of each instance."
"Apache Airflow could be improved by integrating some versioning principles."
"The scalability of the solution itself is not as we expected. Being on the cloud, it should be easy to scale, however, it's not."
"The automation capabilities could be improved; a visual workflow designer and a graphical tool to reduce coding would be very helpful. But for now, it's sufficient for our simple workflows."
"Programmatically, it's very good, and it doesn't have any competitors, but you cannot develop anything in Airflow UI. You need to develop everything within the program. In the market, other tools have come up recently as competitors to Airflow, and they also give graphical programming options, whereas Airflow doesn't provide that feature currently. All the DAGs you want to build need to be coded in Python."
"It would be beneficial to improve the pricing structure."
"The problem with Apache Airflow is that it is an open-source tool. You have to build it into a Kubernetes container, which is not easy to maintain, and I find it to be very clunky."
"I have some issues with the solution's communication."
"The graphical user interface can be improved."
"The product must provide more videos and training materials."
"Documentation can be improved."
"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."
"There should be a multi-tenant solution for the platform where it supports multiple organizations on one platform instead of having to spin up multiple clusters for each organization. There should be an easy way to integrate different departments into one platform without having to operate multiple platforms. The operations should be easier with the enterprise solution. It should not create more overhead for the operations people."
"If there were some industry templates it would have helped significantly, because it is similar to a process map for a domain. That is what we are currently creating, a domain-relevant process map."
"I would like to see better pricing."
"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 initial set up could be simplified, it's complex."
Apache Airflow is ranked 2nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 31 reviews while Camunda is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 71 reviews. Apache Airflow is rated 8.0, while Camunda is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apache Airflow writes "Enable seamless integration with various connectivity and integrated services, including BigQuery and Python operators ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". Apache Airflow is most compared with IBM BPM, Informatica Cloud API and App Integration, IBM Business Automation Workflow, AWS Step Functions and Bizagi, whereas Camunda is most compared with Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM, Appian and Bonita. See our Apache Airflow vs. Camunda 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.