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

Camunda vs iGrafx Process360 Live Platform 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

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
76
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (1st)
iGrafx Process360 Live Plat...
Ranking in Business Process Design
17th
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
23rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Process Mining (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of Camunda is 12.5%, up from 10.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of iGrafx Process360 Live Platform is 1.3%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design
 

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.
SangameshwarKadole - PeerSpot reviewer
A reasonably stable BPM solution useful for process governance and process mining
The look and feel, along with the ease of use of the solution's web modeling version, is an area with certain shortcomings. The web modeling part can be a bit complex or difficult for new users of the solution. Simplifying the look and feel to make the web modeling part easy to use can greatly improve iGrafx.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, the solution has been very solid."
"The most valuable feature is the scheduling."
"The use of Java is a big plus for our intern developers, and Camunda scales well, as many of our departments are already using it in production with dedicated teams."
"Provides an easy way to integrate with the architectural environment."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share the logic within the rules engine with the business, so you can put it up for everybody to read."
"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 visibility – the diagrams you create – and then being able to automate based on them are valuable features. It's easy to explain and comprehend, and the integration aspects are valuable."
"The best feature is the automation."
"Another good feature is that the numbering of the shapes in iGrafx is much easier and more convenient, in comparison to what is found in Visio. So far I haven't found anything similar to what I have with iGrafx, in that regard."
"iGrafx gives you the capability of documenting your process and then the ability to use it as a tool for analysis to identify the loopholes and shortcomings of your process."
"The solution's technical support is of good quality since they offer fast and seamless services."
"Provides a valuable BPMN feature."
"We found the technical support to be helpful."
"Finding the right symbol and creating links, horizontal and vertical are the features I use."
"Simulation is most valuable."
"One of the biggest plus points of the product stems from the fact that I have never seen any glitches in it."
 

Cons

"The cockpit features of the Camunda Platform can be improved to make it a bit more user-friendly, in terms of providing a bit more user experience for non-technical users. There could be some additional documentation added."
"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."
"It's costly and not accessible for small enterprises or startups. It would be great if Camunda offered a tier plan for smaller companies."
"Documentation can be improved."
"The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself."
"The solution could use some enhancements like adding connectors, improving forms and having a mobile app, but everything is an enhancement rather than a flaw."
"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."
"As we experienced some difficulties in the beginning, deployment took almost a month."
"It would be nice to have a Spanish user interface available to us."
"The look and feel, along with the ease of use of the solution's web modeling version, is an area with certain shortcomings."
"With iGrafx, the implementation and the licensing were pretty complex."
"I would love to see a template and shapes for customer journey mapping."
"If customers want to change the color or the logo, they have to go through every page to verify everything is right."
"In the next release, I would like to see more layers like three, four, and five. It might be possible but I haven't seen it yet."
"It would be helpful to be able to do more analytics and generate reports on historical documents that have already been uploaded to the server."
"The solution could benefit from improvements to its interface. More specifically, when compared to other tools, the process modeling features lack symbols or object types that are used to represent the information or data within the process."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license is quite expensive, which is why we went with the community version."
"Camunda is much cheaper."
"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."
"Licensing costs are anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000 USD per year."
"We use a community version."
"It is good for a startup. When we started, its price was fair, but the way we are using it to orchestrate microservices makes it expensive. When you are growing as a company, you would have more microservices, and you would have more users. There is an exponential effect when you are growing in terms of the number of conditions, processes, and users because they bill you per process. So, the price was increasing very quickly for us, and it was very difficult."
"Cheaper licensing and resources than competitors"
"We pay for the license of this solution annually."
"The licensing part is one of the problems. Its licensing depends on the number of users, so it sometimes gets expensive."
"I have heard that the solution's pricing is very competitive."
"Our license is a subscription-based model that is per user. The solution is not expensive, I believe a subscription-based model is $10 per user."
"My company is trying to replace iGrafx because the license is a little bit expensive."
"Earlier, the licensing part was complex because there were so many modules and elements in the tool. Over the last one and a half years, a lot of work has gone into how the product has priced and positioned its tools in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
850,671 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
6%
University
6%
 

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 iGrafx?
The solution's technical support is of good quality since they offer fast and seamless services.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iGrafx?
I have heard that the solution's pricing is very competitive.
What needs improvement with iGrafx?
If customers want to change the color or the logo, they have to go through every page to verify everything is right. We have a strategic approach for the customer. I was involved in almost 100 sess...
 

Also Known As

Camunda BPM
No data 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
Multinational Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda vs. iGrafx Process360 Live Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,671 professionals have used our research since 2012.