We performed a comparison between Fortra's Automate and IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This tool has machine learning and voice recognition and computer vision, which are both quite useful aspects. These aren't available in other tools. It's a good addition to this tool and it gives the solution an edge on the market."
"Compared to other vendors, it's the scheduling tool because a lot of vendors want to charge you extra for their enterprise-level license to have a scheduling tool built in to give you the ability to set up regular schedules to run and do certain data checks."
"I actually quite liked the no-coding functionality."
"The best feature of Automate is its ease of use, which is a major selling point."
"I like the interface; it makes managing automation easy. We can set different schedules and templates for each task."
"We use it for specific cases, mainly secure file transfers, which are vital for us. And it works for us."
"A great feature that you seldom see in these kind of systems is the ability to use a database as trigger to launch a task. This is something I asked for a few years ago and that was added."
"The pricing is excellent. I would give them perfect marks in that regard."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"If you have a business process, and once you have automated that process, you have a readily available workflow in place."
"We can connect with different database types, and they have included a different package for a terminal connection to, for example, AS400. When it comes to UI development, it's not using the drivers or anything. It's not a selector-based development like UiPath."
"I think simplicity is key. One of the things that we've noticed is how our developers have been able to quickly adopt the platform; but not only the developers or the techy people, also the business."
"IBM Robotic Process Automation has greatly improved the organization by improving the speed of performance, as the speed of the robot is estimated to be 20 times faster than the human being."
"The quality is great! It's very strong and has a very strong platform."
"The good stuff about IBM is the fact that it's very easy to use, there are very nice and smart AI tools within the licensing that you don't have to pay any access. Moreover, it's more precise and more secure."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automate mundane tasks. This improves efficiency, reliability, etc. You can form critical operations which can be highly automated."
"I would like to see some better web automation, a wizard like the one in the product WinAutomation would be very nice."
"They do not encrypt passwords, so this is an issue with HIPAA compliance."
"We really need a free development environment for customers. Building and testing automation on production isn't ideal."
"The workflow for variables could be better. The input and output of task-level variables could be made a little clearer in terms of passing those around from one task to another upon success, etc. Things like that could be a little easier potentially."
"The documentation for errors needs improvement as many of the error messages we receive are very vague."
"Some companies have asked for voice integration. This is likely part of the roadmap."
"While this solution is continually improving, as it is now, the user interface could use improvement when I compare it to a product like UiPath."
"The intelligent automation feature could be improved. It's interesting because it's simple, but the automation quality isn't always good. It's easy to use, but sometimes you need to make a slight improvement to the automation, and that's not so easy."
"The scalability of the solution can be challenging."
"Stability could be better."
"One of the things I would definitely like to see is more of the machine-learning and cognitive capabilities. For example, now that we're starting to automate more and more tasks, there are some things that still require us to go back and modify the robots when we need to. But if we had more of the machine-learning integrated into it, I believe it would be easier to maintain, so that we wouldn't have to go back and adjust every time."
"Capturing GUI operations is very easy, but capturing IBM Logistics automation is hard. It does not always work with browsers or automotive applications like SAP."
"The product must be promoted more."
"IBM’s support should improve response time."
"We are looking to see how it can connect with various interfaces seamlessly, through APIs."
"The product's document readers must be improved to capture the data well."
More IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortra's Automate is ranked 5th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 21 reviews while IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is ranked 7th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 23 reviews. Fortra's Automate is rated 8.2, while IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortra's Automate writes "Can automate several processes with only one bot and is easy to implement, administer, and use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) writes "User-friendly interface and good stability". Fortra's Automate is most compared with Microsoft Power Automate, UiPath, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, MOVEit and Automation Anywhere (AA), whereas IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Automation Anywhere (AA), Blue Prism and IPsoft 1RPA. See our Fortra's Automate vs. IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) report.
See our list of best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) 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.