We performed a comparison between Appian and Nintex Process Platform 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."The most valuable features of Appian are the VPN engine, it is fast, lightweight, and easy to set up business rules. Business teams can do it by themselves. That is a very good feature."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"The technical support is excellent."
"I find the BPM the most valuable feature."
"Appian has many valuable features, the first being the ease of development—rapid development. Second, the process of learning the product and tool is faster when compared to its peers in the market. It's closer to low-code, and while it's still not very easy, it's more low-code than other products in the industry. Appian has a good user interface, a seamless model user interface, which comes without additional coding. It can also integrate with multiple systems."
"The initial setup was seamless. We didn't run into any hardships at all."
"The product's most valuable feature is the low code aspect of development. We can develop an end-to-end VPN solution using a single platform."
"The solution has a lot of strong features for the financial industry, it is very easy to use."
"I think the initial setup is fine."
"It has a lot of features for creating and managing workflows, as well as for integrating with other applications. Nintex offers features, particularly to ensure a user-friendly experience."
"The solution offers very good integration capabilities. We've never had issues integrating it without solutions."
"This tool is really helpful in reducing a lot of manual work. Its drag and drop components help to create a workflow faster than SharePoint Workflow Designer."
"It provides data accuracy with fewer failures."
"It leverages the out-of-the-box SharePoint back-end. This means that you don’t need to install or deploy additional infrastructure to support Nintex Workflow, unlike some of its competitors."
"The solution has helped us to automate our business processes, our approval systems, and automation for quickly developing on SharePoint on-prem and SharePoint online."
"It creates workflows to handle business processes. It allows us to route approvals to users without human intervention."
"Sometimes, clients expect us to implement ERP using Appian, which is very complicated. In such cases, I don't believe that Appian is a good tool for that."
"I would like to see more complete university tools. For example, with UiPath, I have had a good experience related to a free course in order to provide some users some different levels of knowledge. This extra training helps users not only use the solution but to develop further within the tool."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product."
"Appian could improve their customer-facing initiatives."
"My only request is that they decrease the license costs."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The solution needs more features. For example, a way to connect to our viewing database, to record, and more interface and component design."
"It is very flexible because you can design your own main forms, but if there were some templates according to your market, it would be more useful for a new customer. That would make K2 more user friendly and easier to use."
"K2 is a workflow solution, and there is no RPA solution with K2. This is where K2 lacks a little bit. It is just a heavy workflow solution. It doesn't have a supplemental product like RPA. If you want to use RPA, you have to use Blue Prism, UIPath, or something else. If you use Nintex, it has an RPA solution. It is a form-based application, and they are doing everything electronically. The initial investment in K2 is heavy because it is a BPM software. It does not have a low cost because they charge you the same for one workflow or 100 workflows."
"User interface could use some improvement. Perhaps integration with Visual Studio or SharePoint Designer would be useful."
"The solution does not integrate with many platforms."
"The licensing needs to be improved. Right now, we find it's getting more expensive to use the product."
"The Workflow Designer needs improvement."
"Unfortunately, Nintex Workflow is not that stable. We are looking at shifting to another tool."
"Currently, a notable challenge lies in the alignment of user experiences across the eight or nine applications within the suite. Transitioning between applications can be somewhat cumbersome due to varying user interfaces. However, the provider is actively addressing this concern by consistently rolling out updates every four to five months, aimed at harmonizing and streamlining the interfaces. This ongoing effort is expected to enhance the user experience over time. In terms of functionality and features, the platform stands out, offering flexibility with the option for both on-premises and cloud deployment. This flexibility extends to the RPA tool, providing clients with choices tailored to their preferences. An advantage lies in the shared security and data infrastructure across the toolset, facilitating smooth data transfer between applications. This contrasts with experiences with Oracle, where data transfer may involve complexities such as the need for intermediary file formats like TXL or SCZ."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 56 reviews while Nintex Process Platform is ranked 9th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 21 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Nintex Process Platform is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nintex Process Platform writes "Offers good integration capabilities and easy to learn and good stability". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and ARIS BPA, whereas Nintex Process Platform is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Pega BPM, SAP Signavio Process Manager and Bizagi. See our Appian vs. Nintex Process Platform report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors and best Process Automation 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.
