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 product has a very good mobile app."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"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."
"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."
"Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"With low-code, we don't need a lot of coding, and then from the plumbing perspective, there is a complete CI/CD pipeline that exists within Appian that can be leveraged for open deployment."
"Write to Data Store Entity - Saving data in SQL databases is done easily using entities. Entities (CDTs in Appian terminology) define relationships and target schema tables via XSD files."
"It has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"It is very easy to use."
"This tool set makes it easy to integrate current processes and increase adoption rates and usage for the tool, as well as the process changes to update it on the fly."
"Out of box connectivity with UiPath."
"The setup is easy."
"The most valuable features of this solution are that it's no code, it's very flexible, and it's easy to design."
"Valuable features include workflows (escalation, reminder, LazyApproval, actions, etc.) and ease of use."
"It has helped us a lot, especially during the initial phase of a project where most of the things are done on paper."
"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."
"The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"Appian could improve their customer-facing initiatives."
"Occasionally, certain pre-made modules may not be necessary and customers may desire greater customization options. Instead of being limited to pre-designed features, they may prefer a more flexible version that allows for greater customization."
"We have clients that want to use Office 365, Microsoft Analytics, and Power Apps. Appian just isn't the same as using something specifically designed to cater to the Microsoft Suite."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"Appian has a few areas for improvement, which my organization raised with the Appian team. One is the Excel output which is limited to fifty columns when it should be up to two hundred or three hundred columns."
"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."
"We cannot use the same solution on cloud."
"The product’s support for the mobile platform and its ability to handle artificial loads could be better."
"There have been some glitches, and the workflow fails frequently."
"User interface could use some improvement. Perhaps integration with Visual Studio or SharePoint Designer would be useful."
"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."
"Bring all features available from the on-premise product into the cloud version and the workflow error reporting."
"The solution needs more RPA and AI features."
"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."
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.
