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

Camunda vs IBM Case Foundation 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Camunda
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (2nd), Process Automation (1st)
IBM Case Foundation
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
31st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Camunda is 22.2%, up from 21.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Case Foundation is 0.4%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Nouman Nawaz - PeerSpot reviewer
Mature product in terms of security and stable product
The architecture is a bit difficult, but in BAW, they introduced the Business Automation Workflow. It's a bit easier compared to Case Manager. Currently, we use Case Manager, so it's a bit difficult to upgrade and handle, but BAW is comparatively much better and easier to handle. The limitation is only for customization because IBM doesn't support it. In some scenarios, if you want some business processes to be customized, we have already spoken two or three times with IBM representatives that we have to customize some of the features in this business process. They would say that if you want to do this automation at your own end, then okay, fine, go ahead, but we are not supporting all this customization. The only thing is the customization because it's a complete standard application.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Camunda Platform is its Microservices architecture, which is easily integrable with APIs."
"The flexibility is great."
"Easy to use and easy to integrate into the products and applications we provide for our customers."
"The interface and the number of connectors that they provide are the most valuable features. The support here, it's kind of okay. But the main thing is with the number of connectors and the UI, the user interface."
"Ease of use and ability to streamline a process model."
"The platform's approach to BPMN modeling is straightforward and versatile, making it easy to adopt and use effectively."
"I think that the positives of Camunda Platform are that our customers can start with the free version. I think it is the most important."
"Using the BPMN helps us to have a common shared communication language when discussing processes."
"The most valuable feature is the content manager part of the file as it is very stable, robust, and reliable."
"It is easy to set up workflows that notify the user depending on certain events."
"The client and the IBM content navigation are the solution's most valuable features."
"The content management is great."
"It provides us the capability of producing b​​usiness processes for documents that are launched immediately when a document comes into the repository."
"The solution is scalable."
"Flexible and the ability to divide search screens, and to search for documents. The ECM feature inside the system is great."
"The most valuable features are those involving decision making, analysis, and anything related to event documents because those processes are related to content as well."
 

Cons

"Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved."
"I have faced problems in bringing up the Cockpit in terms of GUI processes. I think that there is room for improvement in those areas."
"In the future, I would like to see better transactional integrity."
"It would be better if the tool were made less reliant on Java."
"While it's very scalable, it would be great if auto-scaling capabilities were added to it... one area that really could help out would be to have dynamic resizing of the cluster. Right now, you have to do capacity planning."
"I think it would be important to internationalize the Cockpit and the Admin as well as with the Tasklist."
"The migration strategy needs to be improved."
"It would be helpful to have more readily available use cases on the internet. Camunda's documentation feels less comprehensive."
"​The place of improvement is merging or combining all of the workflow functionality into one seamless tool. Now, there are multiple installations that are different. Case Foundation, before you can put Case Manager and you've got IBM BPM, and the roadmap is there to merge them altogether. But that's the struggle at the moment, it's having multiple installations and disparate workflow applications.​"
"There is a need for more open and flexible integration capabilities, allowing seamless collaboration with a broader spectrum of business process management solutions, beyond the confines of IBM's document management offerings."
"Once a workflow is launched then it stays static forever, which is a problem because if there is a change in the business then you cannot change the workflow."
"The cloud version could use more stability."
"There are some features that could be enhanced like the document viewer"
"The service as it currently stands is out-of-date and lacks flexibility."
"IBM needs to update the user interfaces of all its products to make them more intuitive and accessible to beginners. Compared to Microsoft products, IBM solutions are less user-friendly. IBM programs are hard to master. It's a problem in my region because it's hard to find IT staff who can work with IBM."
"We are now using microservices but there are some areas where the coordination with FileNet is problematic."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the community version. There is no licensing cost."
"There is a bit of scope for improvement in how the licensing and pricing are done. They are based on the number of processing instances you execute on the cluster... but on the self-hosted mode, the pricing model should be customized."
"We are using the open-source version of this solution."
"The evaluation of my customers on pricing is that it is reasonable."
"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."
"We pay for the license of this solution annually."
"We have an annual subscription to this solution."
"Its price is decent. Everything is included in the license. The Community version is also good to start with. We are using the Community version."
"This is not an expensive solution and we are using the standard license."
"Pricing is in the mid-range, it is not cheap, but it's not expensive."
"IBM Case Foundation is a little expensive."
"The price falls in the middle range—not overly expensive but not extremely affordable either."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
15%
Insurance Company
12%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 IBM Case Foundation?
A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Case Foundation?
It was affordable, but right now, ten years later, the cost of the product is extremely high. That's why we are looking for another product.
What needs improvement with IBM Case Foundation?
The architecture is a bit difficult, but in BAW, they introduced the Business Automation Workflow. It's a bit easier compared to Case Manager. Currently, we use Case Manager, so it's a bit difficul...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Camunda BPM
Case Foundation, FileNet Business Process Manager
 

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
Suncorp Group Limited
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda vs. IBM Case Foundation and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.