Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache Airflow vs Bizagi comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.8
The tool's open-source nature and Python integration enhance efficiency, though some users see no return on investment.
Sentiment score
7.5
Bizagi users report a 20%-30% ROI, citing enhanced automation, cost savings, and increased efficiency, prompting upgrades.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.2
Users mainly rely on community resources and online documentation, occasionally using internal teams or tech support for assistance.
Sentiment score
7.1
Bizagi offers responsive customer support, though response speed varies, with premium plans mitigating delays; online resources aid accessibility.
There is enough documentation available, and the community support is good.
Forums and community resources like Stack Overflow are helpful.
The toolset is very intuitive, so we didn’t need to contact their support much.
We cannot expect major customer support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Apache Airflow is scalable, effectively used in multi-server applications, supported by cloud integration, despite some deployment complexities.
Sentiment score
6.6
Bizagi scales well with Azure cloud support, though price and server resources affect performance in large expansions.
The solution is very scalable.
Apache Airflow scales well, especially when deployed in Kubernetes environments.
There is no direct scalability option.
If I rate scalability from one to ten, I would probably give it a six.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
Apache Airflow is generally considered stable, though some experience challenges with bugs, management, and infrastructure under heavy load.
Sentiment score
7.0
Bizagi is generally reliable but experiences occasional freezes, slow loading, and performance issues, especially with large processes or updates.
Apache Airflow is stable and I have not experienced significant issues.
I would rate the stability of the solution as ten out of ten.
 

Room For Improvement

Apache Airflow struggles with usability, lacking features and integration, needing improvements in scalability, documentation, and platform support.
Bizagi struggles with performance, licensing complexity, and inadequate integrations, hindering workflow efficiency, collaboration, and user experience.
It is not suitable for real-time ETL tasks.
There is no dashboard for us to check all the Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs); a dashboard would help us analyze the work better.
For more mature environments, the integration to live systems is lacking, which affects its applicability.
Reporting capabilities can be improved more, and community support should be increased.
 

Setup Cost

Apache Airflow is free, but infrastructure costs and commercial support from providers like Astronomer or hyperscalers may incur fees.
Bizagi provides a free modeling version, pricier enterprise features, and cloud options; smaller organizations find it valuable.
I prefer using the open-source version rather than the enterprise version, which helps manage costs.
Apache Airflow is a community-based platform and is not a licensed product.
Bizagi's pricing is very aggressive, and it was one of the reasons we chose it.
 

Valuable Features

Apache Airflow is popular for its user-friendly interface, Python support, extensive integrations, scalability, and open-source community backing.
Bizagi offers an intuitive interface, robust automation, strong integration, and low-code environment, enhancing process management and visualization.
Reliability is good, and when integrated with Kubernetes, it performs better compared to on-premises environments.
Apache Airflow is an open-source platform that allows easy integration with AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud Platform.
It is open source.
The user interface is very good, making it easy for business people to understand.
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache Airflow
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Bizagi
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (6th), Process Automation (8th), Rapid Application Development Software (15th), Low-Code Development Platforms (11th), No-Code Development Platforms (4th), Process Mining (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Apache Airflow is 6.8%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Bizagi is 6.5%, up from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Kemal Duman - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables efficient orchestration of batch processes with very good reliability
I am using Apache Airflow to orchestrate my jobs, projects, and batch ETL jobs. It manages tasks, orchestrates jobs, and helps in handling batch processes effectively, incorporating integrations like DBT and Great Expectations Apache Airflow is easy to scale and its UI improves with each release.…
Paparao Nadipineni - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables budget review efficiency with open source advantages and workflow orchestration
Definitely, right now, it is purely open source, and we don't have much community support. If they add a few more capabilities like AIML and DocGen AI, these features would be good. Reporting capabilities can be improved more, and community support should be increased. Otherwise, people cannot onboard that particular technology easily.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
5%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What do you like most about Apache Airflow?
Apache Airflow is easy to use and can monitor task execution easily. For instance, when performing setup tasks, you can conveniently view the logs without delving into the job details.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Airflow?
I prefer using the open-source version rather than the enterprise version, which helps manage costs.
How easy is it to migrate process flow charts (modeled using tools like Visio) into Bizagi?
I have been using Bizagi with a major project for a state government agency for about four years now. It is pretty straightforward to load in files that are BPMN 2.0 compliant. The option to load V...
What do you like most about Bizagi?
The natural notation is the best feature of Bizagi because it makes it compatible with other products.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Bizagi?
My company uses the free version of the product. In our company, we are doing documentation and modeling. When we reach that point of automating the processes, then maybe we shall acquire the paid ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Airflow
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agari, WePay, Astronomer
adidas, Audi, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Post DHL & many more - 500+ customer globally.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Airflow vs. Bizagi and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.