We performed a comparison between Appian and Pega BPM based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Appian comes out ahead in this comparison. Pega BPM users say it is not robust enough. In contrast, Appian is a high-performing, reliable product.
"Call Web Service Smart Service - Web service integrations with other systems are super simple and fast to create, supported by low code menus."
"Recently, we added Appian Process Mining, Appian Portals, and now Appian RPA."
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"What stands out are the speed of the product, the quick, easy development, and visual diagramming."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"Appian is a very low code platform. It's very easy to learn and use."
"In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"The most valuable feature is the situational layer cake."
"The solution offers excellent workflows."
"Decreased time for plane departures and landing, supported analytical insight for planning of three to six month forecasting, and helped with operational decision planning and support."
"It cuts down the time taken for coding. Earlier it used take for us four hours to do a particular code. Now this can be done in less than 30 minutes. That's the kind of productivity gains you can get."
"The interface is quite simple and easy to use, even for beginners."
"The most valuable features of Pega BPM are low code, no code, functionality, and easy development."
"Pega BPM's most valuable features are case management, integration, the convenience of using REST APIs, and the ease of changing things at the UI level."
"Allowed us to develop and quickly release with confidence using cloud technologies."
"Architecture of product and scalabiility issues."
"The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well."
"The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."
"A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"Appian could be improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with free-built process packs."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"It's called a local platform but on the other hand, it needs a lot of experience. It's not all that easy to click and plug and play. If you really want to use all the features out of this platform, you definitely need a lot of experience and a lot of training to get there."
"It needs more integration with other platforms."
"Pega Cloud early adoption and use for cross enterprise capability was new to many. The early adoption meant version 2.0 of their cloud service may require refactoring and redesign of some services."
"Currently, there isn't any feature I want to be added in the next release of Pega BPM because Pega always adds new features that my team welcomes and looks forward to learning. One area for improvement in the solution is the long learning curve, but after that, you'll find Pega BPM easy to use."
"The training aspect of Pega BPM requires significant enhancement. There should be more opportunities for third-party training and engaging events, such as hackathons where individuals can share their expertise. Additionally, the training structure itself should be more organized, as I have received feedback from my colleagues in the COE that the current training approach is overwhelming and requires excessive referencing to obtain accurate information. Another area for improvement would be the user experience with regard to RPA. Simplifying the IDA for citizen developers would make it easier for them to adopt the RPA tool."
"Compared to other BPM products, the interface is somewhat complex, so the usability could be improved."
"The cost of licensing could be improved."
"The unit testing needs to improve, as well as the user interface."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while Pega BPM is ranked 3rd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 55 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Pega BPM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pega BPM writes "Low code with great APIs and good flexibility". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Mendix, whereas Pega BPM is most compared with ServiceNow, Camunda, Microsoft Power Apps, IBM BPM and OutSystems. See our Appian vs. Pega BPM report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors, best Process Automation vendors, and best Rapid Application Development Software 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.