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

BIC Platform vs Camunda comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

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

BIC Platform
Ranking in Business Process Design
19th
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
28th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Camunda
Ranking in Business Process Design
1st
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of BIC Platform is 1.6%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Camunda is 12.5%, up from 10.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

FS
Software client for modelling and web portal are both directly accessible through one interface
There are just some things in the new product that are not really functional issues but improvements that BIC will have to make. For example, there are some small features that I feel are missing as of now. From an administrative perspective, you might not have the ability to trigger specific actions on a set of workflows. For example, let's say the interface is showing you a list of currently active workflows. Sometime you may find yourself in a situation where you need to select many workflows at a time. An easy example would be that — for whatever reason — you have 1000 or 2000 active workflows and you need somehow to delete them or just to stop them. It is preferable to be able to do this in one click to apply the change to all of them. So I think this is something that is missing which could probably be easily implemented. Right now it just seems omitted. I don't know if the omission was possibly due to a performance issue or if it was chosen by design. But from an end-user perspective — especially as an administrator — this capability to make bulk changes might be a handy solution when dealing with a large volume of workflows that you have to apply a simple command to in a similar way. From my point of view at the moment, all the most important features I am in need of are available. All the tools necessary for daily business for process modeling are there. There certainly is room for improvement. Many other features might be important depending on the specific use case. For instance, there are many notification features that already exist within the tools. These could notify people with different roles based on the specific workflow that is being triggered, which is pretty nice and efficient. I think the tool is quite stable right now, which is positive, and I don't believe it does require further additional things — especially if these are small things and to get them in would be rushing the development. If that may somehow affect the stability and usability, I would rather wait. Something that would also be improved in the workflow is just a cosmetic change. But it could also be a functional change. As an end-user, I do expect to be able to make selections of a set of workflows and apply some specific action to the group. If you have a list, then you should be able to select all the list items or part of the list and apply changes to that selection. This might be just something very easy I believe, to fix from their side.
FABIO NAGAO - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The central dictionary is a valuable feature."
"This is low-cost and very user friendly. A variety of models are available depending on the needs of the customer."
"The product is easy to use."
"While this is a new product it has a mature feel from being built by a company with many years in the business."
"We are using the BPMN engine of Camunda; we are not using the user interface. We are using just the engine, the back end of this. For us, it is working quite well."
"The headless nature of the Camunda Platform is something that has helped us to build our own logic and platforms on it."
"Camunda Platform has a very good interface for workflow and business process design."
"It is open-source. It supports microservice orchestration. This is what we are really interested in. We can customize our products depending on the use cases."
"The product is stable."
"Its flexibility stands out as the most valuable feature."
"The architecture is good because it's a headless workflow. I can create my own frontend, and it's fully API-based."
"Easy to use and easy to integrate into the products and applications we provide for our customers."
 

Cons

"The solution could improve its connectivity to other systems."
"As the product is very new, some minor features are still missing, but everything is there to handle day-to-day process modeling."
"There's an issue with the current manual that they're working on."
"The product needs improvement regarding the confidentiality of the domain information for the key administrator."
"The solution's pricing and scalability could be improved."
"The product's initial setup phase is difficult for beginners."
"I would like to see better pricing."
"Would be helpful if there were additional out-of-the-box activities."
"Community support is basically what I'm looking for. Other than that, it is okay for now."
"Like all BPM tools, they're very bad with proprietary UIs. In general, anyone who uses BPM tools should not expect to use their proprietary UI."
"I don't like the UI of the Camunda Platform, I have found the Signavio solution to be much better for me to create the process designs and execute them. Additionally, I have found the tools in the Camunda Platform are not compatible with some of my other tools. They should improve this in the future."
"Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Scalability-wise, it is an expensive product."
"Pricing will differ between enterprises based on needs such as customization, but the company uses a standardized algorithm for determining this."
"I think Camunda BPM can improve their licensing costs. It isn't easy to find clients with Camunda BPM licenses mainly because it's quite expensive."
"The product is expensive for a small or medium-sized company."
"Camunda has a free service as well as a commercial service. We are using the free service."
"The price is competitive with products like Bonitasoft and RHPAM (Red Hat Process Automation Manager). We have two versions of Camunda. The first version was open source, without support, but then we got a supported version."
"There is an open-source version available, that in its core features (workflow and decision engine, modeler) is exactly the same as in the enterprise version."
"I tried to get some information about buying the license for the solution, but I found it kind of hard to understand the business model."
"We are using the open-source version of this solution."
"The product's price depends on the number of processes that need to be automated or where the orchestration part needs to be used. The product is affordable for medium and large enterprises."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BIC Platform ?
The central dictionary is a valuable feature.
What needs improvement with BIC Platform ?
The solution could improve its connectivity to other systems. For instance, I need new connections to KPIs. KPIs are linked to processes, I can't access the dictionary of processes to make KPIs.
What is your primary use case for BIC Platform ?
We use the solution for drawing the processes.
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...
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...
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

BIC Cloud BPM, BIC Platform
Camunda BPM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Daimler AG Siemens AG RWE Bundesministerium des Innern Uniklinikum Köln Vattenfall Ziemann Dermapharm AG Postbank LBBW EDEKA
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
Find out what your peers are saying about BIC Platform vs. Camunda and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.