ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Camunda comparison

ActiveBatch by Redwood and Camunda are both solutions in the Process Automation category. ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked #6 with an average rating of 9.5, while Camunda is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.2. ActiveBatch by Redwood holds a 0.6% mindshare in PA, compared to Camunda’s 27.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of ActiveBatch by Redwood users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Camunda users who would recommend it.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Read 35 ActiveBatch by Redwood reviews

716 Views
239 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Camunda

Read 77 Camunda reviews

15,823 Views
10,358 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Camunda

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Camunda and ActiveBatch by Redwood are competitors in the process automation category. Camunda appears to have the upper hand in customization and flexibility, while ActiveBatch excels in user-friendly functionalities and efficiency.

Features: Camunda offers customization and flexibility, supporting BPMN, DMN, and CMMN standards. It has a lightweight architecture and benefits from community support and advanced API integrations. ActiveBatch stands out with robust integration capabilities, user-friendly drag-and-drop functionality, and extensive job scheduling options, making it efficient for predictable tasks.

Room for Improvement: Camunda could improve its user interfaces and documentation, enhance default UI configurations, and expand community engagement. ActiveBatch users suggest improvements in its monitoring dashboard, support services, and ease of use for beginners, alongside requests for a streamlined setup process and better training resources.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Camunda supports deployment across various cloud options, including hybrids, and offers strong enterprise support but could engage better with the community. ActiveBatch provides reliable support with a challenging initial learning curve, making training essential for newcomers.

Pricing and ROI: Camunda's open-source offerings make it cost-effective initially, though enterprise support can increase expenses. ActiveBatch is valued for its comprehensive licensing model without agent fee complexities, although a shift to subscription models has led to cost reassessments. Both products deliver ROI through efficiency and development savings.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Camunda Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Camunda

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Ranking in Process Automation

6th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed File Transfer (MFT) (5th), Workload Automation (6th)

Camunda

Ranking in Process Automation

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Process Design (2nd), Business Process Management (BPM) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 0.6%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Camunda is 27.8%, up from 26.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Process Automation

Featured Reviews

Shubham Bharti

Senior Analyst at Capgemini

Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation

Occasionally, I find myself contemplating if there is room for improvement in the user interface (UI), and envisioning that with certain enhancements. The UI could potentially offer a more refined and user-friendly experience, fostering smoother interactions and facilitating easier navigation for users engaging with the application. New users might encounter a minor setback due to the absence of readily accessible training videos, which could have otherwise proven to be an invaluable resource in aiding their initial familiarization with the platform, potentially hindering their seamless onboarding process and delaying their ability to harness the software's full range of capabilities to its utmost potential.

Read full review

FABIO NAGAO

Chief Technology Officer at Looplex SA

Reduces costs with hardware abstraction and simplifies scaling

There is an issue where, in some situations, I need to scale up by observing both CPU and memory usage of containers, yet under the current options available at Amazon, this is not possible. I have to choose between monitoring CPU or memory to scale my solution. Not every software is built for deployment as a container service, although the current architecture trend is changing this.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"What ActiveBatch allows you to do is develop a more efficient process. It gave me visibility into all my jobs so I could choose which jobs to run in parallel. This is much easier than when I have to try to do it through cron for Windows XP, where you really can't do things in parallel and know what is going on."

"It is very useful in sending confidential files through FPP servers."

"ActiveBatch helped us automate and schedule routine tasks such as data backups, file transfers, database updates, and report generation, which frees IT staff to focus on other studies."

"Managing the workload and monitoring the tasks were very difficult with manual interventions. Now, by using ActiveBatch, the process is automated and it runs tasks on a scheduled basis."

"ActiveBatch provides summary reports and logs for further analysis and improvements in monitoring servers, which is very handy."

"We leverage the solution's native integrations regularly. We have to get files from a remote server outside the organization, and even send things outside the organization. We use a lot of its file manipulation and SFTP functionality for contacting remote servers."

"The user interface is really incredible."

"Using this tool, if there are any huge failures, we immediately get an email notification, and the proper team will be informed, at which time they can act accordingly."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood pros

"The BPMN diagram is valuable. For our use case of transferring money from one account to another, the connections have to be done in the traditional financial ways. There are a lot of unexpected errors and a lot of instability with this kind of system, and we are using Camunda in order to have clear flows. With BPMN, I can show a flow to my business partner, and the business team can easily understand what's going on. The technical team can understand what the implementation is, and we can model different errors and the process for recovering from these errors."

"I can use any other tools to create services and the UI, and then use them together with the Camunda BPMN engine."

"The modeler is useful for creating the flow. The way to access the data through their REST API is also valuable. This is what we're using right now."

"It is a scalable product. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten."

"Easy to use and easy to integrate into the products and applications we provide for our customers."

"I like everything about the entire BPM that comes with the BPM suite."

"Camunda is a scalable product."

"It is simple to use. The user experience is very good."

More Camunda pros

Cons

"As more organizations are moving towards a cloud-based infrastructure, ActiveBatch could incorporate more capabilities that support popular cloud platforms, such as AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud."

"An area for improvement in ActiveBatch Workload Automation is its interface or GUI. It could be a little better. There isn't any additional feature I'd like to see in the tool, except for the GUI, everything looks good."

"They have some crucial design flaws within the console that still need to be worked out because it is not working exactly how we hoped to see it, e.g., just some minor things where when you hit the save button, then all of a sudden all your job's library items collapse. Then, in order to continue on with your testing, you have to open those back up. I have taken that to them, and they are like, "Yep. We know about it. We know we have some enhancements that need to be taken care of. We have more developers now." They are working towards taking the minor things that annoy us, resolving them, and getting them fixed."

"There are very few documents that provide us with detailed information on the troubleshooting of errors that occur during integration with the existing environment."

"The help center and documentation are not that helpful."

"The documentation is very limited, and it can be improved."

"It does have a little bit of a learning curve because it is fairly complex. You have to learn how it does things. I don't know if it's any worse than any other tool would be, just because of the nature of what it does... the learning curve is the hardest part."

"The reporting needs improvement. There is a real need for the ability to generate audit reports on the fly. It needs to be a lot easier than what I can do right now. This is a major item for me."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood cons

"The Camunda Modeler installation poses a challenge, requiring local installation, which doesn't help collaboration like other online tools, for instance."

"As we experienced some difficulties in the beginning, deployment took almost a month."

"Initially, installation was challenging, but recent improvements have made it much easier."

"The initial setup can be complex for business users."

"The migration strategy needs to be improved."

"When building interfaces, there are limited tools to work with, especially when dealing with different types of tasks, such as user tasks and system tasks."

"The latency of API could be decreased."

"We're trying to put the people from the business to do it. We are using APIs, and we have open APIs to define our APIs and the request-response that each call requires and sends. So, to base the mapping on that, there was nothing to help. I know that with some tools, such as Oracle tools, you can see the input and expected output. With drag and drop, you can take one property from the left and drag it to the right, and it does all the mapping itself, but that's not the case with Camunda. So, for me, this is something that can be improved."

More Camunda cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"ActiveBatch is currently redesigning themselves. In the past, they were a low cost solution for automation. They had a nice tool that was very inexpensive. With their five-year plan, they will be more enhancement-driven, so they're trying to improve their software, customer service, and the way that their customers get information from them. In doing that, they're raising the price of their base system. They changed from one pricing model to another, which has caused some friction between ActiveBatch and us. We're working through that right now with them. That's one of the reasons why we're why we were evaluating other software packages."

"I don't think we've ever had a problem with the pricing or licensing. Even the maintenance fees are very much in line. They are not excessive. I think for the support that you get, you get a good value for your money. It's the best value on the market."

"Currently, we are paying approximately $7,000 yearly, which includes support."

"I like ActiveBatch Workload Automation's licensing model because they're not holding you down on an agentless model or agent model, where every server needs to have an agent. That's the main selling point of the solution and I hope they stay that way."

"If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."

"It allows for lower operational overhead."

"The pricing was fair. There are additional costs for the plugins. We have the standard licensing fees for different pieces, then we have the plugins which were add-ons. However, we expected that."

"The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."

"Licensing costs are anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000 USD per year."

"We pay for the license of this solution annually."

"We are using the paid edition because there is no separate support and service license yet. We are yet to find a suitable licensing model for Camunda because we only use the engine, and we have implemented our solution around Camunda Cloud. So, we are mainly interested in the support and service, and that's what we mainly use in the paid edition."

"The product is expensive for a small or medium-sized company."

"While the license isn't budget-friendly, careful consideration and calculated planning for a significant number of licenses can make it more cost-effective."

"We use Camunda's community edition, which is free."

"Camunda is a cheaply priced product, making it one of its major USPs."

"We are using the open-source version of this solution."

More Camunda pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Computer Software Company

10%

Insurance Company

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

27%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

Managing the workload and monitoring the tasks were very difficult with manual interventions. Now, by using ActiveBatch, the process is automated and it runs tasks on a scheduled basis.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

I'd advise users to start by knowing what the actual requirement is and thoroughly assess the automation needs. New users should take advantage of the demos and trial versions so they get an idea o...

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

After upgrades we are facing a few issues and errors triggered, so focusing on this would be appreciated. Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referrin...

See all answers

How does Bonita compare with Camunda Platform?

One of the things we like best about Bonita is that you can create without coding - it is a low-code platform. With Bonita, you can build the entire mechanism using the GUI, it’s that simple. You c...

See all answers

Which do you prefer - Appian or Camunda Platform?

Appian is fast when building simple to medium solutions. This solution offers simple drag-and-drop functionality with easy plug-and-play options. The initial setup was seamless and very easy to imp...

See all answers

Which would you choose - Camunda Platform or Apache Airflow?

Camunda Platform allows for visual demonstration and presentation of business process flows. The flexible Java-based option was a big win for us and allows for the integration of microservices very...

See all answers

Comparisons

Control-M vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 30% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 20% of the time

Tidal by Redwood vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 13% of the time

Stonebranch vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 11% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 10% of the time

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Competitors

Apache Airflow vs Camunda

Compared 13% of the time

Bizagi vs Camunda

Compared 9% of the time

Flowable vs Camunda

Compared 8% of the time

IBM BPM vs Camunda

Compared 7% of the time

Bonita vs Camunda

Compared 7% of the time

More Camunda Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood

February 2025

Download ActiveBatch by Redwood product report

Buyer's Guide

Camunda

February 2025

Download Camunda product report

Also Known As

ActiveBatch

Camunda BPM

Overview

ActiveBatch by Redwood automates and manages batch processes, data integration tasks, and workflow scheduling. It's used for file transfers, data processing, server monitoring, and report generation, supporting both on-prem and cloud environments.

Organizations implement ActiveBatch by Redwood to automate complex job scheduling and data workflows, integrating seamlessly with FTP, SQL, PowerShell, and other systems. With features like real-time monitoring, error handling, and centralized management, users can significantly boost productivity while minimizing manual intervention. Its flexibility in supporting on-premises and cloud environments makes it adaptable for diverse IT landscapes. The tool simplifies workflow orchestration with an extensive library of pre-built steps and robust API integrations, ensuring efficiency in handling various workloads.

What are ActiveBatch by Redwood's key features?

Job automation: Automates routine and complex jobs.
Real-time monitoring: Offers instant insights into job performance.
Customizable workflows: Tailors workflows to specific business needs.
PowerShell integration: Supports advanced script execution.
Job triggering: Initiates tasks based on specific conditions.
File handling: Manages file transfers and processing efficiently.
Server management: Monitors and handles server tasks consistently.
API integration: Connects with various applications for streamlined operations.
Alerting: Provides notifications for critical job events.
Flexible scheduling: Enables detailed and adaptable job scheduling.

What benefits and ROI can users expect?

Centralized management: Simplifies oversight of all processes.
Productivity boost: Reduces manual effort and errors.
Time savings: Accelerates task completion and workflow execution.
Comprehensive visibility: Enhances monitoring of all job activities.
Reliable performance: Ensures consistent task execution.
Scalability: Adapts to growing business and IT needs.

In various industries, ActiveBatch by Redwood is used to streamline operations, whether in finance handling large-scale data processing, healthcare managing patient records, or retail optimizing supply chains. It addresses specific needs by offering robust automation, efficient job scheduling, and seamless integration with existing systems, driving operational excellence and efficiency.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Camunda enables organizations to orchestrate processes across people, systems, and devices to continuously overcome complexity and increase efficiency. A common visual language enables seamless collaboration between business and IT teams to design, automate, and improve end-to-end processes with the required speed, scale, and resilience to remain competitive. Hundreds of enterprises such as Atlassian, ING, and Vodafone orchestrate business-critical processes with Camunda to accelerate digital transformation. To learn more visit camunda.com.

Camunda

Sample Customers

Informatica, D&H, ACES, PrimeSource, Sub-Zero Group, SThree, Lamar Advertising, Subway, Xcel Energy, Ignite Technologies, Whataburger, Jyske Bank, Omaha Children's Hospital

24 Hour Fitness, Accruent, AT&T Inc., Atlassian, CSS Insurance, Deutsche Telekom, Generali, Provinzial NordWest Insurance Services, Swisscom AG, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VHV Group, Zalando

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Camunda

January 2025

Free Report: ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Camunda

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Camunda and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Camunda report.

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.