We performed a comparison between Bizagi and Everest Blueriq based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Apache, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."BPMN 2.0 compliance, while you model the processes, the system can detect your notation errors."
"The ability to write our own code inside each activity is beneficial. Sometimes we need to create functionality that doesn't come out of the box, and this allows us to do that."
"The approval process is simple."
"It is quite a stable solution."
"One of the features I like is that when drawing any task, when putting a task on the process model canvas, I can simply click on it and see the other task icons for that task. It's just one quick, simple, straightforward connectivity from task to task."
"The solution's simulation capabilities are the most valuable aspects."
"The product enables the users to automate the processes and provides a good user experience."
"Your team can work on it having basic training about databases and BPM modeling."
"The biggest benefit of using the product is identifying the issues, enabling a more flexible working method."
"I would like to see more in terms of analytics and better reporting."
"Its price can be improved. The price is high for the application as well as for maintaining and developing applications. When you develop, for example, a BPM, you need to pay a lot for Bizagi."
"I'm not really satisfied with the reporting aspect."
"Its performance needs to be improved. The main thing is that it is limited, especially in terms of the response times. When the processes become a bit large, it is very awkward to work with the Bizagi modeler. When you have already modeled but start to rearrange, it is quite a bit of an effort to change the stuff. When you rearrange lanes or have new structures, it goes rather squiggly up and down and so on, which could be improved. The visual outputs of the DIREPs of the process models are pixelated and have a bad image quality. It is a PNG or JPEG, and you cannot export it as a PDF. When you have rather large processes, you should be able to arrange them hierarchically. Currently, it is not supported. If you use sub-processes and inflate a process, suddenly the arrangement is totally different, and although you know the process, you have to look where is it now. You need a good understanding of the levels of your processes before you start in Bizagi. It can have automatic support for optimal presentation. In BPM, you should have it from the top left to the bottom right. However, in most cases, people don't know how they should arrange it. Therefore, it would be nice to have a suggestion system for different arrangements to be able to better present the process."
"There could be more documentation."
"Framework approach, which extends to reusability in tools, like Pega, for deployment management could be improved."
"The solution is a bit heavy on resources and has slowed down my computer."
"Difficult to export in formats other than PDF."
"The platform's initial setup process could be better."
Bizagi is ranked 7th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 78 reviews while Everest Blueriq is ranked 33rd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews. Bizagi is rated 8.4, while Everest Blueriq is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Bizagi writes "A flexible, customizable solution that reduced time to market, but the UI and customer support could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Everest Blueriq writes "Stable platform with valuable case management capabilities ". Bizagi is most compared with Camunda, Visio, Bonita, Microsoft Power Apps and ARIS BPA, whereas Everest Blueriq is most compared with Pega BPM.
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.
