We performed a comparison between CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] and IBM BPM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."If I have a higher workload with smaller machines, it is easy to increase everything."
"The product is stable. This is the reason that we are using Automic, in some cases, because of its stability and features."
"It provides a simple reduction of headcount and also a reduction of run through time."
"Jobs are planned automatically to eliminate the need to plan them manually. It also saves us effort because there is no need to create job objects manually."
"IBM BPM is easy to deploy."
"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 has an elaborated way to explore the IBM BPM processes."
"We have automated processes with IBM BPM and DocuSign. Its valuable features include low-code, timer, etc. It makes it simple to implement the products. We generate reports using the solution."
"The solution is stable."
"It excels at analytics. It provides visibility across all activities of a company's processes and performance."
"It is easy to take a requirement, put it in the code, and deploy it."
"IBM BPM should become cloud-native. It should also add a cloud deployment feature."
"In the last two years or so, Automic has not invested as much in the product as we would have expected."
"What I am missing today is robotics. If Automic would like to stay as one of the biggest automation engines on the market, they have to find an option with a robotics solution."
"Consider an admin console during deployment. I would like to migrate single instances, not the whole bunch at once."
"The setup was quite complex because the solution was cutting-edge at that time and IBM invested considerably in the implementation, likely at a loss to themselves."
"The product is extremely complex to use and administrate."
"The constant switch between Eclipse and its web versions can be annoying and confusing."
"They should incorporate an API gateway functionality within it to simplify integrations."
"The analysis reports could be much better."
"Performance on large scale requirements could also be improved."
"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."
More CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Process Automation while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Process Automation with 105 reviews. CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is rated 10.0, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] writes "Automation of job object creation increased the quality and quantity of our job requests". 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". CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is most compared with , whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow.
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.