We performed a comparison between Appian and F5 BIG-IQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Appian is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster."
"Technical support has been amazing overall."
"I find the BPM the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"Process culture is making noise inside the organization because now, everybody knows that their time is being monitored."
"The setup is easy."
"It has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"Scalability: To move from larger boxes to smaller boxes, along with virtualization. So, we are not locked into a particular size."
"We use this solution on a daily basis, and it is very stable."
"F5 BIG-IQ reduces the propensity for error."
"F5 BIG-IQ has always provided us with great support."
"F5 BIG-IQ is a central management system for the BIG-IP."
"The reporting feature is quite good."
"Features like AFM, the gateway, and Global DNS are the coolest features that save work for us."
"The most valuable features are load balancing and WAF."
"Appian is easy to set up, but JBoss is complex. JBoss is the application server for running Appian."
"It has it's own built-in UI components and doesn't provide much flexibility to customize or extend those components."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"Native mobile capabilities or hybrid mobile app capabilities are very limited. Things like offline sync, offline storage, access to smartphone device features, etc. are not supported by the Appian platform yet."
"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."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"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."
"The solution could improve robotic process automation."
"The shell, kernel, or Linux has something like a delay, especially with the Virtual Edition, when you are trying to implement it in the cloud and you want to access it remotely with web management. It would be great if they could improve their kernel. It was difficult for me, especially when I got started with BIG-IP. I was struggling to find which commands work with it. If you want to work with it, you have to be a Linux guy."
"Integration with VAS is something that they need to work on."
"The solution's rSeries has been made free, and iSeries should be made free as well."
"F5 BIG-IQ is a complex solution, and it cannot manage everything related to BIG-IPs."
"F5 BIG-IQ should improve by being a complete certificate management solution because currently, it is only for Venafi. Other automation platforms, should be added."
"Sometimes the solution does not work."
"They could use YAML or JSON if they wanted to make it a little bit easier for us."
"There are a lot of scripts available on the internet for people who know how to use them, but with a graphical interface, it would be easier for new users."
Appian is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 56 reviews while F5 BIG-IQ is ranked 24th in Process Automation with 12 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while F5 BIG-IQ is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IQ writes "A central management system to manage and monitor a bunch of different BIG-IP devices". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas F5 BIG-IQ is most compared with ServiceNow Orchestration. See our Appian vs. F5 BIG-IQ report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.