ABBYY Vantage Reviews

We are using the solution in our company for extracting details from invoice copies.

In our company, using the solution, we have seen that overall automation is quite easy. The output and time for developing the process are quite less.

It's worth noting that ABBYY Vantage employs both AI and machine learning techniques. Additionally, integrating with ABBYY Vantage is easy, with LinkedIn options available for use through the platform's built-in activities.

The customization can be done using ABBYY Vantage. But I don't have complete knowledge of its pricing.

Customization in the solution needs to be modified. In the future, I would like to see the product have better customization functionality.

I have been using the solution for a month. Also, I am using the solution's latest version. My company has a partnership with ABBYY Vantage.

Stability-wise, I can't rate the solution since it is still in the PoC phase. Once the products which we are developing go live, we can figure out the stability of the product. As of now, I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven to eight out of ten.

The technical support is helpful. I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Previously, I used to use FlexiCapture. Still, we are using FlexiCapture in our company. ABBYY Vantage is user-friendly. Also, it has custom activities, and integrations are quite easy.

The deployment process can be done in a few minutes. So it can be done in less than 30 mins.

We were able to do the installation with the help of our in-house team. We already have a platform team who actually helped us with installation. So, I just started using the tool last month. I wasn't involved in the installation since I am a core developer who works on the design. Approximately 10-12 members are using the solution in its PoC phase. Later on, it may expand to thousands of users.

The cost is per page we use. So, the number of pages we use will be its cost.

I would definitely recommend the solution to those planning to use it. I am yet to explore the solution's load-balancing feature. I rate the overall product between seven to eight out of ten.

To be more concrete, I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

For ABBYY Vantage, we have access to various use cases involving different languages, primarily related to invoices. However, we have recently started receiving multiple types of documents, including those used for billing purposes in factories or warehouses. Therefore, we do not have a specific use case but multiple use cases for ABBYY Vantage.

Regarding features, the pre-trained models in ABBYY Vantage are extremely useful. They are capable of detecting a majority of the fields that we need.

One major area that requires improvement in ABBYY Vantage is its current JSON output format. We expect an upgrade from ABBYY that will offer XML or CSV formats. In FlexiCapture, we can download the output in a CSV format. In Vantage, we receive the output in JSON format. Then, we need to extract the JSON output and use various APIs to convert it to an Excel format, which can be troublesome. Therefore, we hope that ABBYY will address this concern with an upgrade.

As of now, ABBYY Vantage is working fine. I want the solution to have a very good pre-trained model that can be trained using only two to three documents for new templates instead of the current requirement of ten documents for different templates. That kind of smart pre-trained model is what I want in ABBYY. ABBYY already has a pre-trained model, but they need more because they only have three to four at present. Make additional models for different areas so that the solution can detect information not just from tables or documents but also directly from images.

I am currently using ABBYY Vantage, but after being introduced to Nanonets, I started comparing their parameters, which led me to peerspot.com. I have been using ABBYY FlexiCapture for the past three years. However, in our company, we have been using ABBYY Vantage since October 2022. My company has a partnership with ABBYY.

Stability-wise, I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Based on our business operations currently, the solution isn't very scalable. Maybe in the future, it might change when we have better use cases in our organization. So, scalability-wise, I rate this solution an eight out of ten.

At present, there are 22 team members in our organization who are currently using the solution. However, we have not yet provided access to other teams or for business uses directly. So, taking into account the developers or the support staff, a total of 22 people are currently using the solution.

We currently have full technical support from our vendor, a direct partner of ABBYY. Our organization has also established a good relationship with ABBYY, which allows us to benefit from their technical expertise whenever needed. Based on my experience, I would rate the support provided by ABBYY Vantage as high.

ABBYY Vantage has been designed as a user-friendly solution, making the setup process require only a couple of days. It typically takes no longer than a day to create an instance and begin using the software. Additionally, once the user has received some training or has access to ABBYY's generic documents, they can quickly learn how to use the solution. In our organization, the solution's deployment was done on the cloud.

While I am not aware if anyone was involved in the implementation process, I can confirm that we have consultants. However, we are looking for opportunities where we can provide direct access to our business. This would involve the need to create and deploy the entire project taking our help, but we do have another consultant to do that since we have multiple projects across the globe.

Our company receives discounts because of our good partnership with the vendor and our vendor's partnership with ABBYY. So, from a pricing point of view, I rate this solution a nine out of ten. This rating is after considering other tools similar to ABBYY Vantage in the market, for which the prices are pretty high compared to the price of Vantage, which is less.

Like ABBYY Vantage, Nanonets also provides powerful pre-trained models that effectively detect required fields. We have been trying both Nanonets and ABBYY Vantage. We have been utilizing Vantage in multiple projects, but we have recently discovered Nanonets, which is a new and good tool. So, that is why I was looking for a comparison of the parameters of both solutions online.

Even though we have become aware of Nanonets at our company, we still prefer using ABBYY Vantage. At the moment, I am evaluating both tools. However, I believe that if we can provide direct access to the Onepage tool for our business and create different instances for our business partners so that they use our ABBYY licenses on their projects, then we would recommend ABBYY. The inability to do so would be a disadvantage, and we would consider recommending a different tool.

I recommend ABBYY Vantage to those who are planning to use it. The major requirement considered by business partners is the access provided by the solution. They also want the tool to be user-friendly. The business partners want the solution to allow direct training without needing external vendors such as consultants or developers. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to extract data, and to combine it with other solutions to provide end to end processes.

We like the fact that this solution is enterprise-ready, so it can be deployed on-premises, scale it, etc.

We would like the workflow building within this solution to be more transparent, which would allow us to model the process.

Also, the large number of components within this tool can make deploying and managing the solution quite complex.

Lastly, we feel that the usability of the interface could be improved by the use of cognitive capabilities, to make it more user-friendly. At present it is quite complicated to understand how to use this solution, and can take time to master effectively.

We have been working with this solution for two years, but we have been more actively engaging with it for the past year.

This is a fairly stable solution. In our experience there have ben some issues, but these have not stopped production. Instead it has cost us time in order to contact support, understand the issue, and then to mitigate future risk.

This is a scalable solution, as far as we are aware.

The support for this solution tend to respond in a timely fashion. However, more complex issues may mean a delay in replies.

Positive

This solution is fairly complex, even for expert users, to setup and deploy. There are a lot of components involved in the initial setup, and a lot of documentation to go through in order to deploy the tool successfully.

The licenses for this solution are payable on a yearly basis, and are transferable from one year to the next, if they go unused.  The license payment also includes a number of support hours from the vendor.

I would recommend organizations to evaluate this solution if they are looking into data extraction products. It is complex to implement and use, meaning it will require time to use effectively, but it provides good results.

We would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for processing invoices that follow a particular template. We have some standard invoices on a monthly basis and use UiPath to download them from our suppliers. The downloads are extracted and exported to the solution.

We previously used the solution's on-premises version but it is no longer supported. We used the trial cloud version until we bought our license one month ago. 

We are in the development phase but once we go live, we will have many users for the verification station.

The solution has its own language that can be configured many ways and with higher accuracy than other products.

Programming interfaces should include intelligence or documentation. It is difficult to find documentation and implement without some information included in the backend scripting pages.

The support network is weak and needs improvement.

I have been using the solution for one year.

The solution is stable for documents that are standard format.

The solution is scalable.

The support is weak and it is difficult to find answers for day-to-day problems. There is no forum for answers and not many users are familiar with the solution to help with issues. The provider should have documentation for everything but it is not reaching end users.

Tickets are not responded to in a timely manner and it is difficult to get email responses or escalations. There is no standard format for support and they just respond whenever they like. In contrast, UiPath helped with anything needed.

I rate support a four out of ten.

Neutral

We used UiPath's Document Understanding but it had issues finding items that were marked in particular locations.

Accuracy is comparatively higher for the solution. You have the option to write rules in the backend which can be manually verified if a document does not satisfy conditions. Once verification is complete, the document feeds back and the solution picks up the rest of the processing. This flexibility was not available in UiPath.

UiPath also required too much user involvement at the time of our implementation, but I believe this has improved over time.

The cloud setup is straightforward and only requires configuring the development environment which includes flexi layout studio and product setup station. Any security concerns can be addressed through an SSO or AD integration.

The on-premises setup is a bit complex because it requires understanding connections.

We implemented the solution in-house.

Maintenance and updates for the cloud version are handled by ABBYY. We receive notification of updates in advance. Typically, an update requires some upgrade in the development environment to ensure there is no impact to users.

Our license is $6,000 and includes unlimited users for the verification station.

Licensing is a bit on the high side.

We looked at ABBYY's invoice processing but were not satisfied with the results so we moved to the solution.

The solution is the best for use cases with standard document templates. If your documents do not follow a particular format, then you cannot use the solution. 

The features for AI and processing lag behind so I rate AI a five out of ten.

Overall, for our purpose with standard document templates, I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

ABBYY Vantage is used for reading documents that require OCR or document intelligence, such as sales invoices.

The UI is user-friendly and ABBYY Vantage supports over 100 languages.

The handwritten recognition has room for improvement.

ABBYY Vantage is mainly available on the public cloud but for clients that use a private cloud, it is complicated to set up the solution.

I have been using ABBYY Vantage for two years.

I give the stability of ABBYY Vantage an eight out of ten.

I give the scalability of ABBYY Vantage a nine out of ten. The solution can handle millions of documents.

I give the initial setup an eight out of ten. There are two ways to utilize the solution. An individual can use the web-based user interface, which is easy to set up. If we intend to use the solution for bulk sorting, we'll need to use the API, which is also straightforward to set up. The full deployment can take a couple of days.

We implement the solution for our customers.

The price for ABBYY Vantage is at par with its competitors. I give the price a six out of ten.

I give ABBYY Vantage an eight out of ten.

We have over 1,000 people using the solution.

ABBYY Vantage offers better language support compared to its competitors, and it also demonstrates good connectivity and accuracy.

ABBYY Vantage is primarily designed as an enterprise-level solution that effectively fulfills OCR requirements. However, I do not suggest this solution for small companies or individuals.

We use this solution for supplier invoice processing work. We started using it because we needed a solution for supplier invoice automation.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

There are about 20 end users.

It's easy to use.

I would like to see a machine learning model to make the solution more intelligent.

There are no issues with stability.

Initial setup is easy.

It costs 5,000 Euro per year for one license. There are almost 500,000 pages available, so I think the price is good for what we have. It's worth the money.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. 

There are some technical constraints, but if you can address those, then the solution is good to use.

There are competitors, so I would like the ability to explore more options.

We had to extract some data from a commercial policy, which can run up to 300 pages, for a client. It was a challenge to look for the action data and extract it out of those 300 pages. With ABBYY FlexiCapture, we were able to do that easily by using its repeating group feature. It was helpful. For doing the same in Kofax, we would have had to heavily rely on scripting. There is no way of doing it with low code.

Its ease of use is valuable. It is easy to use and configure.

Its ICR is really good at handwriting recognition. The last version of ABBYY FlexiCapture that I used was better than other tools such as Captiva and Kofax. The base OCR engine of ABBYY is also very good. In fact, Kofax was using ABBYY's OCR engine in the last version, but they came up with their own engine.

One good thing about ABBYY is the training. All the training courses are available in ABBYY University. They were not free initially. They were instructor-led, but now, ABBYY has made them open for everyone to learn, whereas with Kofax, you have to purchase training courses, and then you can learn. With ABBYY, everything is there in their knowledge base.

I have not used it in the last six months, but at that time, there were some stability-related issues. These were known issues. They might have already fixed them, and it might have been improved by now. We had raised tickets, and they were working on various tickets. The known bugs included crashing of the application when there were more than 500 pages in the configuration window. It did not work in such cases.

There were also issues related to the classification by training. There is a feature in ABBYY where you can classify the type of a document, but it was not very effective when you trained it on a lot of variations. It worked fine for up to 10 or 15 variations but for anything beyond that, it was a mess. It wouldn’t work.

They can have more advanced workflows. They can have some custom status in their workflow. It was there, but they can introduce more cases such as triggering an email or interacting with other systems with APIs. They can be included as stages in their workflow rather than doing it all by scripting. 

They can also work more on connectors. The ABBYY connectors are there for SAP and SharePoint, but they can include more connectors. ABBYY's usage has increased. I have seen many companies using ABBYY in recent times, and it will help a great deal if there are more connectors to connect with the end systems.

I had worked with ABBYY FlexiCapture for around five years. Currently, I'm working with Kofax, and I have not worked with ABBYY for the last six months. The last version that I used was version 12.

I have not seen FlexiCapture environments with a lot of users. At the most, I have seen 20 users, which included five or six business users, five or six developers, and a few people from the admin and config team. That could be because at the time of implementing a project, not many people were required. When we handed over the project, more business users would have been created. It all depends on the phase of the project.

We did try to reach out to them for some of the challenges. They wanted us to take some proper services consulting, but we were able to manage on our own. We did not interact with the services consultant from ABBYY.

I used ABBYY FlexiCapture in my previous organization. Currently, I'm working with Kofax. Both of these organizations are service-based, and they provide services related to implementation, development, and other things. The tool that we use is decided by the client. When we approach a client, if they have already purchased a license of ABBYY or Kofax, we have to execute the use cases by using that tool. Otherwise, it will be a loss of a lot of money for them. 

If they don't have a tool, we do try to suggest what would be best for them, but it is up to them to decide which tool they want to go for. They can go for ABBYY, Kofax, TotalAgility, or any other tool.

I would recommend ABBYY FlexiCapture for those use cases where only OCR is needed, and there is no need for business processes. That's because not much branching is there in the workflow. It does not have a powerful workflow feature. If you are using it in association with any BPM or RPA tool, there is the ease of configuration, extraction, and classification. That's one thing that I like about ABBYY.

FlexiCapture is a good product. It can be used for any kind of use case that requires OCR. Except for the unstructured content part, which is there in Kofax, I cannot think of a use case that cannot be solved by using this solution. It caters to most needs of the projects. ABBYY is positioning this tool as only an OCR tool, not as a BPM tool. Kofax is an OCR and BPM tool. That's the difference, but I would not like ABBYY to change it because that's what makes ABBYY the simplest. There is a single component, which makes it easier to understand. When you add more features and modules, the complexity also increases from an understanding perspective. We can suggest more features, but it would be a trade-off.

It is a straightforward setup. If you have a cloud deployment, you just need your tenant. You simply start using it after installing a thin client on your machine. 

I have used ABBYY on the cloud. I had used ABBYY as a standalone installation on my machine. I have used ABBYY as a distributed solution within our VPN.

Deploying simple bug fixes in ABBYY doesn't take much time. It can be done within two minutes. When deploying the whole project from scratch, I have not seen it take more than 10 minutes. It can be done easily, and it is a straightforward process. To import from one environment, you just change the variables to cater to the needs of another environment. You just go there and import it. It is that simple.

You need to purchase user licenses, and you also need to purchase the license for the pages. User licenses are required for your developers to use the developer tools, and you also need to ensure that there is a pool of licenses for the business users so that they can log in and perform their activities.

It has a very simple GUI. When a person is using ABBYY FlexiCapture for the first time, I would suggest exploring all the features, especially the Flexilayout Language, because it is very easy to explore all the features. It provides you with a great level of flexibility to configure complex documents. ABBYY is no-code, but there are a lot of things that you can do by scripting in Flexilayout Language. So, I would recommend not restricting yourself to the GUI-based commands. You should go and try Flexilayout Language. It is a very powerful feature in ABBYY.

ABBYY is launching new products. It is not that they're not changing anything. They have launched Vantage 2.1, which is very good at cognitive capabilities.

While pitching their tool, every product's sales team tells clients about certain cognitive capabilities and other features, which might not be possible for specific use cases. So, client expectations should be set correctly. One of the clients was expecting us to use the cognitive capabilities of FlexiCapture, but FlexiCapture is not that cognitive. Vantage is cognitive, but FlexiCapture is not.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. There is ease of use and ease of configuration, but they need to include more features. They need to make the product more stable in dealing with more variants.

I mainly use ABBYY Vantage to process loan originations for cars.

ABBYY Vantage has reduced our data because it can classify and extract information from documents.

ABBYY Vantage's most valuable feature is auto-learning.

ABBYY Vantage's reporting could be improved - they don't have any out-of-the-box or detailed advanced reports.

I've been using ABBYY Vantage for about a year.

I would rate ABBYY Vantage's stability five out of ten.

I would rate ABBYY Vantage's scalability eight out of ten.

We've seen an ROI from ABBYY Vantage.

I'd give ABBYY Vantage's pricing a rating of seven out of ten.

I'd recommend ABBYY Vantage to other users and give it a rating of seven out of ten.

I am using the solution mostly for voice processing.

We have approximately 30 use cases in our company.

The most valuable feature of ABBYY Vantage is flexibility. You are able to edit at a granular level providing good control over the process. Additionally, the brochures and guides were helpful in learning the solution.

ABBYY Vantage could improve the processing of handwritten notes.

I have used ABBYY Vantage within the last 12 months.

In our region, we have a lot of Arabic text that is handwritten which the solution could improve.

I rate the stability of ABBYY Vantage an eight out of ten.

The scalability of the solution depends on the use case. However, if the solution is managed well it is scalable.

Our company is expanding and correctly we have approximately 16 users of the solution.

I have not used the support from the vendor.

There might be a need to complete a few courses to get used to the implementation of ABBYY Vantage.

We did the implementation of ABBYY Vantage in-house.

We were able to qualify for a reasonable price. The price is in the low to medium range compared to other solutions.

I rate the price of ABBYY Vantage an eight out of ten.

I evaluated IBM and AI builder prior to choosing ABBYY Vantage.

If you do the training it will be easy to use.

I rate ABBYY Vantage an eight out of ten.

Our company uses the solution to develop structures for automatically reading customer documents. We produce the document definition for each layup and send data to customers. We have 40-50 developers using the solution in various departments. 

In the future, we will use the solution for automatic classifications of documents. 

The solution responds well to automatic document classifications with a 90% success rate. 

There are sometimes issues with calculations or integrations with the server when running multiple products with different languages. This causes data to not display properly in data fields. 

The system does not always train itself to recognize data properly from system leads. 

A more comprehensive training program should be available because free training books do not provide the level of detail needed. Sometimes, we encounter issues with an automatization but cannot resolve it even though we completed the associated training module. Training for particular scenarios need to be included in modules because integrations can be tricky or complex without these details. 

I have been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is very scalable. 

We had one issue with speed where we could not achieve the minimum time for processing which should have been seconds. Otherwise, the solution is really fast with basic or fixed processing. 

Support does not answer tickets in a timely manner but eventually closes questions. 

For example, I have a few tickets for assistance with DVP, data pages, and working with multiple languages but support has not yet responded adequately to the email inquiries. I would like detailed information and an explanation for whether a shadow case can be used. I cannot authenticate, determine if available onloads would fix captures, or integrate without proper answers. 

Support should respond quickly to production issues. Time zones are an issue in getting responses because support works on Russian time. 

Support should have access to prior tickets to get a cumulative picture of issues a user has experienced. Generally, they do not have details from prior tickets to inform solutions so they base their answers on only the current ticket. Having cumulative knowledge will allow support to better understand a customer's situation and use case. 

I rate support a six out of ten. 

Neutral

The setup can be complex because it takes time to learn all the menu options. Our setup took one or two months because we wanted to ensure it was done properly. We do not use many of the menu options as our use case is rather basic. 

The help page is not very comprehensive or detailed. It uses code that is formal and the world is now more informal so some options might confuse users.

I have not evaluated other options. 

The solution is a good product but there is always room for improvement. I rate the solution a seven out of ten.