We performed a comparison between AuraQuantic and IBM BPM 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."It's a low-code application."
"AuraPortal is very user-friendly and flexible."
"AuraQuantic's most valuable features are the zero code, user-friendly mode, and integration."
"AuraPortal has the best price for its process."
"Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly."
"IBM BPM should become cloud-native. It should also add a cloud deployment feature."
"It has reduced a lot of manual errors and processes."
"It continues to keep up with the changing needs of the business. That is the strong value proposition of BPM. It's not a one-time automation."
"It provides a very robust environment to build an integration framework or workflow patterns that we have. A lot of changes or modifications have been made to this solution over the past few years. The features that they have added this time have helped developers like us to work on the developmental environment and leverage all the capabilities of the tool. This is what I like about this solution."
"There is information during the process that the analyst will look at, their procedures. We created a part of the application such that the business can change those procedures as needed, on a daily, weekly, monthly basis. As the reps go through the process, they don't necessarily know it's changing, they just know they have to refer to some documentation, and the business can keep that up to date."
"It is efficient in reducing costs."
"The Process Designer is good. We like how we can drag and drop and link the processes up, that works out great for us."
"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."
"We'd like it more animated. It would be useful if we could integrate GIFs, for example."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"Better integration with other products in the automation suite."
"Some of the features are not enough for my business. We need to build custom user management for the many end users affected by BPM."
"They should incorporate an API gateway functionality within it to simplify integrations."
"We are a government organization, and we are the largest government power sector in India. We generate around 30% of power in India. Therefore, our processes are quite complex. Although IBM BPM is a low-code or no-code software, if you want to have extremely complex workflows, just the business process diagrams are not helpful in creating those workflows. While implementing complex workflows, only the process flow diagrams did not help us. We had to write a lot of Java scripts and Java queries to achieve what we wanted. Its integration capabilities with the SAP environment have to be improved. At present, we are only talking at the web services environment level. Its price also needs to be improved. It is currently expensive. Previously, Active Directory required a heterogeneous environment, but now they want a homogeneous environment. We had onboarded employees through Microsoft Active Directory, and now I have to implement Microsoft AD only from the cloud for my vendors."
"The product is extremely complex to use and administrate."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"The engine itself tends to accumulate a lot of data that needs to be cleaned up, and that's the kind of thing that keeps it from, in some scenarios, scaling as much as it needs to. And then, when you're building solutions, if you're not careful to keep the screens from being associated with too much data, if you're going to just do things the way that a lot of people would just assume that they can do, without having experience of having made those mistakes before, it will accumulate a lot of data, and that will cause it to perform very badly."
"It can definitely be improved in terms of performance and stability."
AuraQuantic is ranked 18th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 6 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews. AuraQuantic is rated 8.8, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of AuraQuantic writes "Responsive support, easy to use, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". AuraQuantic is most compared with Appian, Camunda and Bizagi, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow. See our AuraQuantic vs. IBM BPM 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.