Camunda Reviews

This solution enables the development team to quickly create prototypes and put them into production.

If Camunda could develop something that creates user forms that would be a great feature to have. They also need to improve the UI.

It is extremely stable.

It is very scalable and it scales horizontally. You can basically automate every single process in the company.

We have not used tech support yet. 

We did not use a prior solution to this solution.

I would say it's medium complexity to setup. You do need development skills but the experience has been clear for us.

We have a lot of users, almost 1,800, and we needed something affordable, stable, and something that could be used by a large financial company. This solution truly fit the bill.

It is less cost-prohibitive than other solutions on the market. This solution was in our price range.

We also looked at IBM BPM, Peg, and Appian.

We are using the Camunda Platform to build data models.

The solution is good for data models.

I don't like the UI of the Camunda Platform, I have found the Signavio solution to be much better for me to create the process designs and execute them. Additionally, I have found the tools in the Camunda Platform are not compatible with some of my other tools. They should improve this in the future.

I rate Camunda Platform for approximately two years.

We have many people in my organization using this solution.

I have not contacted support, we use our internal IT team for support.

I have used other solutions previously, such as Signavio.

We have an annual subscription to this solution.

I would not recommend this solution because I did not have a good experience.

I rate Camunda Platform a five out of ten.

Primary use case is for fast prototyping innovatie processes within the social domain of the government.

Camunda has enabled us to do quick prototyping within end-to-end team consisting out  of information architects/process architects/developers and product owner to form a consistent view in business value, achitectural compliancy and technology.

The number of client implementations and cross-language capabilities to support multiple frameworks is very pluggable compared to other BPM engines out there. It's also more portable than most of them. Next to being open source, the modellers are made in HTML and can be embedded in your own website with little effort.

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.

The solution could also use more and better frameworks in terms of embedding them in the engine. Right now the only embedded framework that's supported is Java. It's not a problem because you can also have remote workers that do part of the process through their remote RESTful API which they have clients for, but you cannot embed .NET. You cannot embed that for execution within the engine through delegates, so I would definitely say that would be a plus if they would expand that. Certainly in terms of performance.

I've been using the solution for two years.

I haven't had any issues with any instability.

There's a free version and an enterprise version, so it depends on which you choose but it's very scalable, but you have to understand it's persistence strategies as it uses a centralized database. That's normal for a BPM, however. In their new product Zeebe, which is a derivative of Camunda, they've made it completely decentralized and scalable via partitions, which might be more generic and easier to understand than the forementioned persistence strategies of Camunda. Because of partitioning, Zeebe is also a step forward into better orchestration in a micro service landscape. On the other hand that comes with the cost of complexity of installation. I would say for small to mid-size companies Camunda is scalable enough.

We're using it in the innovation field labs for the government so there's about potentially 350 municipalities there, and the number of people who are participating in this common ground field lab is about 150 potential developers, product owners, business analists that can be tied together in their disciplines around the Camunda Process and Decision Modelling Engines. A few products in those labs are now being developed using Camunda.

We are able to do everything from community support. Everything is well documented there. There has been no need to get support from them specifically but one of the owners writes a lot of papers and presents webinars which you can join for free. I would say they have very, very good support and are very open-source community-minded. I think they are one of the most supportive companies I've seen.

I don't have any knowledge about the paid support, because we don't do paid plans. I suppose that it would be great because if their free seminars and white papers are good, I suppose a higher level of support would be great, they really know what they are doing.

We used a workflow engine. The reason for switching is compliancy by design. Mainly Object Management Group (OMG) and Triple Crown Standards (BPMN, DMN, CMMN), which are supported by Camunda allowed us to reach this compliancy.

It depends on how you set it up. If you want to set it up for demo purposes or development and start working with the product, the set up is fast. The first one I installed took me five minutes and it was running.

We wanted an open source engine. Therefore we did not evaluate other engines such as Mendix, Pega.

We use the free version, the open-source version, but there is an Enterprise option. And the Enterprise version has heat maps so you can easily optimize complex processes on performance. You can easily see the hot spots that need to be scaled in a different manner in terms of hardware or improving your process flow.

I would definitely recommend the solution to anyone. At least for the short-term. They are currently shifting towards their new product, Zeebe. We are actually currently using it already in smaller labs on smaller projects, such as modelling process flow's and micro service orchestration driving front end ui's such as digital assistants. But there is not much difference between the two so, I would definitely advise anyone starting with a BPM, in general, to start with Camunda. I found Camunda really easy to start with.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

Use cases vary depending on the client's needs. It depends on the customer. We have done a lot of flow automation for the return and authorization, like vehicle return material authorization. We have done a lot of automating their campaign systems. .It purely depends on the customer's requirements.

The interface and the number of connectors that they provide are the most valuable features. The support here is kind of okay. But the main thing is with the number of connectors and the UI, the user interface.

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.  

It should also have some kind of a custom-engineering extension that will add on to it.

I have been using Camunda for four to five years.

They support a scalable solution on cluster mode. We don't run into a massive scale, but we run with 1 to 5 million. 

The businesses we support range from small to medium.

To be neutral, I would rate their support a five out of ten. Having regional support would add value. 

The initial setup is pretty easy. It depends on the people who are installing it. It generally takes a few days.

I would recommend it, as long as the business team can design the workflows, but the technical team can design the workflows. If they are technical, then I would definitely recommend it. For enterprise-grade, I would recommend looking into bigger equipment. 

I would rate Camunda BPM an eight out of ten. 

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.

I've been using this solution for over five years.

This is a stable product - it works and doesn't disturb me or the IT director.

I previously used Activiti, but it had no well-developed tools to monitor administration or develop new processes.

Our initial setup was quite complex and took around six months due to some bureaucratic issues. However, I think that it could be faster for organizations without such issues.

This isn't a very expensive solution, and it's cheaper than its competitors in terms of licensing and resources.

Functional agility is the main reason we use this platform. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our clients. 

The flexibility is great. 

I appreciate the compact and clear source code.

We have faced problems with the performance.

Camunda has two options: the Camunda main platform and Camunda Cloud. Right now we are trying to solve problems with the Camunda Cloud and there are significant problems with performance. We communicated this with the Camunda team. We're a member of the Camunda community and we try to solve those problems with them.

Community support is lacking and you need to pay for enterprise support.

I'd like to have the ability to buy into the data model. There are no data models in Camunda and we need information about variables and process instances. In other BPMs or other big BPM platforms, for example, IBM, there is that feature.

I've been using the solution for a few years at this point.

We've had some issues with the performance of the product, particularly on the cloud deployment. 

We have about 100 people using the solution at this time. 

We only have developers that use it. We are a development company.

We didn't buy Camunda enterprise support. We only use community support and we don't have, to be honest, enough community support. It's not very helpful. We have many unanswered questions.

We've worked with many different solutions, including IBM, BPM, Oracle, SAP, and VPN platforms, among others.

I like Camunda due to the fact that I can embed it into our infrastructure applications. The library, not the whole sales server.

We use the community version, which is free. I'm not sure of enterprise pricing.

You do need to pay for the enterprise level to get support. Otherwise, you have access to community support, and it is lacking. 

We are end-users of the solution. 

I'd advise potential new users to learn BPM notation. It is an issue due to the fact that we have to propagate BPM notation to our customers as a lot of customers don't know what is it and how to use and why BPM is a good solution.

Currently, this is the best solution compared to global JBPM and other open-source BPM platforms.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for credit flow processes in the banking industry, like loan approval processes and so on. The solution offers good automation and it is pretty simple to build a business process. We've also tried integration with other robotics and it was feasible.

Because we are partners, we currently use an enterprise edition. But sometimes we help our clients with community versions, so I have experience of both. These versions are very similar. The community version contains all the necessary features because there are only some applicable features in one of their web applications. 

I have found that this solution's applications are very competitive when it comes to some other tools, and not every tool has some front end applications for end-users. So Camunda will start with a complete application, which is quite useful, and they are ready to use directly after installation and payment. 

I would like to have a feature for audit logging and audit log management, and some history of use for the audit logs. It's not anything I need, but our clients often require these features and then we have to do it ourselves. I would also like additional models for location.

The solution is quite stable. We have had only one incident regarding stability. It was something between the IBM web publications server and Camunda, so I cannot say if it was backing Camunda or IBM BPM, and perhaps it was something between the two solutions. But since then everything has been very stable.

It is hard to say if this solution is scalable. We started with Camunda in Germany, and now they can't form them into a global company. We've contacted their support team on this, and sometimes it takes very long to get an answer from them. 

Their support system changes their authenticator on a daily basis and they are working on improving their response time. But it's not easy for me to get the right person if I want to discuss a problem. You work with one guy today, and tomorrow it will be another guy. Then I have to explain everything all over again. So it takes a lot of my time. The technical support, however, is still better than IBM BPM.

We used IBM BPM and Activiti BPM but we switched to Camunda because of the pricing model. Camunda is much cheaper. We've also found that IBM BPM is not really stable, some applications are very complex and some project verdicts were not as successful as we expected.

The initial setup is not that complicated, but it isn't easy either. Deployment took a few days. The deployment time depends more on the complexity of what you want to do with Camunda than the size of your organization. 

When I compare it to other BPM tools, like IBM, it is great, open source, and free when you use the community version. We are also working on the enterprise version, so we are very satisfied.

I feel that there is always room for improvement, so I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our company uses this product for the automation of core banking processes. I'm an enterprise architect and team manager and we are partners with Camunda.

We are system integrators, and the value of Camunda for us is that it's easy to integrate into the products and applications we provide for our customers. The product is based on BPMN and is closely integrated with that standard. It's not complicated and generally easy to use, particularly for students and junior developers who come to learn from us as part of their studies.

It would be helpful if the solution had additional out-of-the-box activities.

I've been using this solution for about a year. 

The product is stable.

The product is scalable. 

We use the Camunda community if we have any problems. We haven't needed to engage directly with any level of support from Camunda. The company arranged some learning sessions before we started using the solution and we already had a lot of experience with other platforms. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. 

We're using the open-source version of the solution. 

We evaluated Activiti as a possible alternative to Camunda but we decided to go with Camunda. 

If you're considering an open-source tool, I would recommend Camunda and rate it eight out of 10.