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

Camunda vs Flowable comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.0
Camunda excels in scalability with proper architecture, though database management and documentation could be improved for optimal performance.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.3
Camunda offers a flexible, user-friendly platform for efficient process automation, supporting BPMN, CMMN, DMN standards, and seamless integration.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
4.7
Camunda users seek enhanced customization, internationalization, integration, training cost reduction, workflow tools, scalability, and better community support.
No sentiment score available
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Camunda is highly stable and reliable, though specific integrations can affect performance under heavy load, earning high stability ratings.
No sentiment score available
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.6
Camunda's customer service is praised for responsiveness and resources, though some desire better integration support and response times.
No sentiment score available
 

Setup Cost

Sentiment score
6.1
Camunda provides a more affordable solution with free open-source and paid enterprise options, ideal for various business needs.
No sentiment score available
 

Categories and Ranking

Camunda
Ranking in Process Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (2nd), Business Process Management (BPM) (1st)
Flowable
Ranking in Process Automation
26th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Peter Broucke - PeerSpot reviewer
Support is good (even the basic one), documentation is readily available and matches the need for agile development
Probably one area I look forward to has to do with AI and how Camunda sees the AI angle on workflow. I know they're working on that or at least communicating about it. They already have versions to run on the cloud, so they've tackled that. We're looking at what they will come up with otherwise. As long as the product gets enough traction and evolves, we're happy. With open source, you can monitor what's happening. If the product is being left by many customers, that's a sign. We're also users of Camunda, and you can watch one of our guides' presentations in the States about one of our implementations. Our focus now is on developing service management and DMN APIs for the platform. AI is something we take into consideration, but we'll see what additional benefits it could bring and how to interconnect it with our data or AI engineering.
Simon Greener - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps to control the workflow and business process components of customers' operations but OSGi integration can be challenging
I'd rate my experience with the initial setup of Flowable at about a three out of ten, but for our developers, it's probably closer to a six. I found it challenging due to the complexity of the user and help documents and the fact that much of the Flowable documentation and tutorials are focused on cloud-based implementations. Since we're primarily interested in basic components like BPMN models and form design, which aren't included in the product, the learning process was more difficult for me. In contrast, our developers are more comfortable diving into the code and technology stack, which allows them to be more proactive in their approach. The deployment took three months to complete. We're still in the deployment process. Our main challenge is integrating the Flowable process engine into our product, which uses OSGi. This has led to complexity in managing the Java versions and dependencies, as the tool has around 150 Java files. We could have chosen to interact with Flowable via a Docker container and the REST API, which would have isolated the OSGi Java dependencies, but we decided to integrate it directly. This has required resolving Java version control issues and upgrades, leading to various development challenges that must be addressed. It is a learning process for all of us. As an integrated solutions architect, I would have probably opted for the Docker route rather than the direct OSGi integration chosen by the developers. However, since they went with the OSGi integration, it's taking us longer to complete the deployment. Currently, we have one full-time developer dedicated to deployment, along with one part-time developer, and my involvement at about a quarter of my time. So, we have about two people working on deployment. As for maintenance, we're not entirely sure yet. Given our direct OSGi integration choice instead of Docker and REST, maintenance may be more challenging. However, we'll have a clearer picture once deployment is complete.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
11%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What do you like most about Flowable?
The tool's most valuable feature is the process engine. It allows us to define BPM-based workflows, deploy them into our process engine, and interact with them within our product.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Flowable?
Since the tool is open-source, we don't have to pay anything for it. It's free to download and use, which is great for us. If Flowable hadn't been available as open source and required a license fe...
What needs improvement with Flowable?
In my opinion, areas of improvement for Flowable include the management and creation of forms within the open-source components and the documentation and examples provided. While the cloud-based Fl...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Camunda BPM
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
1. Adobe 2. BMW 3. Cisco 4. Dell 5. Ericsson 6. Ford 7. General Electric 8. Honda 9. IBM 10. Johnson & Johnson 11. Kia Motors 12. LG Electronics 13. Microsoft 14. Nike 15. Oracle 16. PepsiCo 17. Qualcomm 18. Red Bull 19. Samsung 20. Toyota 21. Uber 22. Visa 23. Walmart 24. Xerox 25. Yahoo 26. Zara 27. Accenture 28. Bank of America 29. Citigroup 30. Deutsche Bank 31. ExxonMobil 32. Facebook
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, BMC and others in Process Automation. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.