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.
"Process Modeling enables creation of business process workflows. You can create complex business workflows in a visual manner, and it is also easy to debug/monitor."
"The Application Designer is very user friendly. There are also lot of plug-ins that you can use and, for the most part, they are free."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"It's heavy on business processing in terms of logic, process workflows, and primarily on the process design modeler. Appian is really great at that. In terms of the full stack set from a low-code platform perspective, it's definitely an eye opener since it can be deployed via mobile app and on the web as well."
"The tool is very flexible."
"Technical support has been amazing overall."
"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."
"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."
"The most important features of Pega BPM are case management and claims management, and soon they'll also be offering claims processing. I also love Pega BPM in terms of performance. It's also one of the very few user-friendly solutions in the market. It may take some time to learn Pega BPM, but once you get a proper handle on it, tracking and managing processes become very easy anytime, anywhere. Pega BPM also has very good documentation you can use to learn the solution. Pega has a community portal that has complete information and explanations, and if you're facing a challenge, you can post your challenge on the community portal and get a resolution at the same time."
"It is a stable product."
"Can do a lot of things with minimum time and cost."
"The robotic process automation has increased the confidence of business users."
"It is quite configurable, which is the most exciting feature. We can easily configure it as per our needs."
"The solution's case management is its most valuable aspect."
"Application development is very rapid. A lot of code gets reused while building the applications, which is something we highly appreciate."
"The case management functionality of this solution has been most valuable."
"Appian is easy to set up, but JBoss is complex. JBoss is the application server for running Appian."
"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."
"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."
"The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well."
"Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution."
"An area for improvement in Pega BPM is security. It's secure, but it still has a lot of vulnerabilities. Pega BPM is robust, but it still needs some improvement performance-wise."
"To learn Pega, you need to be a partner. If someone just wants to learn Pega for the sake of learning, they won't be able to do so as they don't give access to that."
"Sometimes when we are patching some data from the database, we are getting added as a timeout."
"Business specific functionality is needed."
"The biggest thing I have seen is when going from one version to another and upgrading to the latest version, it takes a pretty long time for an organization to go through an upgrade process. I think that's an area where they can make it a little smoother."
"It needs more integration with other platforms."
"Pega BPM could improve the UI, it is poorly designed to have a good UX experience."
"The local development approach is good in Pega, however, cost-wise, it's getting expensive. That needs to be addressed."
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.