We performed a comparison between AuraQuantic and Camunda 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."AuraPortal is very user-friendly and flexible."
"It's a low-code application."
"AuraPortal has the best price for its process."
"AuraQuantic's most valuable features are the zero code, user-friendly mode, and integration."
"It is open-source. It supports microservice orchestration. This is what we are really interested in. We can customize our products depending on the use cases."
"We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we are sharing it with our business users."
"Easy to use and easy to integrate into the products and applications we provide for our customers."
"When I compare it with other BPM tools, like IBM, it is great, open source, and free when you use the community version."
"The most valuable features are the management of internal processes, the ability to execute from design and the model for internal processes, the ability to make processes visible, and the ability to have information about the current state of each instance."
"Camunda's most valuable feature is its ability to integrate with different products."
"The most valuable features are the workflow, the task list, and the modeler where we use VPN."
"The best feature is the automation."
"We'd like it more animated. It would be useful if we could integrate GIFs, for example."
"More documentation and the ability to extract different reports about different relations in the objects I use will help."
"AuraQuantic's price could be improved."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"The support definitely can be improved. Apart from that, the language should be extendable to other platforms. If I want to write, I'll run a different platform, like Python code on top of it, or COBOL code on top of it, and it should support those languages."
"I would also like a very easy to use form builder."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"The product must provide more videos and training materials."
"It is not difficult to change existing processes. The difficulty was in integration, for example, to call an external web API, and in the security capabilities, to use a vault for secrets. That was difficult."
"The support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The business model could be easier to understand."
"I don't like the UI of the Camunda Platform, I have found the Signavio solution to be much better for me to create the process designs and execute them. Additionally, I have found the tools in the Camunda Platform are not compatible with some of my other tools. They should improve this in the future."
AuraQuantic is ranked 18th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 6 reviews while Camunda is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 68 reviews. AuraQuantic is rated 8.8, while Camunda is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AuraQuantic writes "Responsive support, easy to use, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". AuraQuantic is most compared with Appian, Bizagi and IBM BPM, whereas Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian. See our AuraQuantic vs. Camunda report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) 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.