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

Camunda vs OpenText Process Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 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 Management (BPM)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (1st), Process Automation (1st), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (3rd), AI Software Development (2nd), AI Customer Support (8th), AI IT Support (7th)
OpenText Process Automation
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
28th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Camunda is 9.9%, down from 21.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Process Automation is 1.1%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Camunda9.9%
OpenText Process Automation1.1%
Other89.0%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

CristianoGomes - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Supports long-running asynchronous processes effectively but has not evolved much in recent years
I think Camunda is focusing too much on the SaaS offering right now and not much on improving and developing the product itself. I did not see any innovations on that aspect, especially for the open-source version. I was making some tests recently and the tool seemed pretty much the same as it was three or four years ago. Since they made the move to cloud deployment in a more SaaS-oriented way, they do not invest too much in the community version. To be honest, it did not change much from the Activiti initial version. Activiti was pretty much what Camunda is today. They invested a lot on Zeebe and made it the engine for their SaaS cloud version. Camunda itself, the embedded engine, did not evolve too much. They could invest more on that.
Senthil Natarajan - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Operating Officer at a outsourcing company with 51-200 employees
The solution enables automation of supply chain and invoice processing with comprehensive integration and workflow capabilities
The main valuable features of OpenText AppWorks are the BPM modules. There is the standard BPM modeler and a case modeler. These are two strong features from the workflow layer. Additionally, the integration capability of the solution is beneficial. With these features, we are able to use OpenText AppWorks for automating supply-chain-related problems, vendor process automations, and invoice automations. We have built almost twenty-plus types of solutions and implemented around three hundred fifty-plus implementations. The solution also allows us to integrate it with our ERP system.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It allows me to present or to demonstrate the business process flow, visually, without having to resort to PowerPoint, Visio, or other products."
"The architectural part of Camunda for workflow design is highly valuable, especially the Camunda Modeler, which allows quick process design and implementation."
"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."
"One reason we selected Camunda or Cloud/DB is that it comes with the support of the BPMN notation, which helps to define processes in a standard manner. Another reason was that Camunda Cloud, as the name says, is designed for a new cloud era."
"The product is stable."
"The modeler is useful for creating the flow. The way to access the data through their REST API is also valuable. This is what we're using right now."
"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."
"Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure. It is more elaborate."
"In terms of the scalability and the handling of complexity, the customers are satisfied, and we also have confidence in the solution to achieve whatever implementations are required."
"We really appreciate the process automation and how can you create human tasks as one of your processes."
"We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenText AppWorks, especially those incorporating low-code functionalities, have had a significant positive impact. In some cases, we've observed a remarkable reduction in development time, ranging from 50 to 75 percent. The MTP model and life cycle have facilitated rapid development cycles."
"The good part of OpenText AppWorks is that all of its components are together in one platform, including integration capability, UI capability, and workflow capability."
"One of the most useful features is the code is customizable, we can make it our own."
"From a business perspective, the most valuable aspect lies in the optimization of processes."
"The monitoring aspect is highly valuable, as it offers an exceptional capability to track every minute of action performed by a business user in the global context."
"AppWorks is a very quick development platform with low-coding capability and strong integration with third-party systems."
 

Cons

"Especially when you use the open-source version, there are issues with performance."
"If Camunda could develop something that creates user forms that would be a great feature to have. They also need to improve the UI."
"Customization and tech stack could be up-to-date."
"The business model could be easier to understand."
"The GUI needs to be improved, with more configuration options."
"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 support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It would be helpful to have more readily available use cases on the internet. Camunda's documentation feels less comprehensive."
"The crucial missing element is the archival function."
"There could be some improvements with the low code design part. It could be more customizable and more user friendly."
"From an enterprise point, their pricing is a little bit crazy because they don't have a SaaS model."
"The integration could improve."
"OpenText AppWork's low-code capabilities can be enhanced by integrating them with AI offerings like Aviator."
"AppWorks could be improved by including BPM simulation."
"The solution needs to continue to enhance the low-coding feature within the product itself."
"A room for improvement in OpenText AppWorks is its user interface. It should have mobile compatibility because right now, you still have to make two applications with a user interface for Android and a user interface for iOS, so if OpenText AppWorks can provide one UI that can be used across all devices, that would make the solution better. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of OpenText AppWorks is a better UI in terms of the look and feel. Another feature I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is mobile compatibility because, at the moment, you have to make your application mobile-ready or compatible with mobile devices because there's no provision for it in OpenText AppWorks."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the paid edition because there is no separate support and service license yet. We are yet to find a suitable licensing model for Camunda because we only use the engine, and we have implemented our solution around Camunda Cloud. So, we are mainly interested in the support and service, and that's what we mainly use in the paid edition."
"We have an annual subscription to this solution."
"We are using the community version. There is no licensing cost."
"I use the open-source free version."
"We're using the free version. We used the Enterprise version for some time. If I compare free versus what we paid at that time, the Enterprise version costs a lot. For the additional functionality that we got with the Enterprise version, it was too costly."
"Camunda Platform is an open-source product."
"The license is quite expensive, which is why we went with the community 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."
"AppWorks is pretty expensive."
"There is a user-based perpetual license."
"The price is on the higher side."
"The licensing cost varies based on several factors, such as the size of the customer and the domain URL."
"Pricing for OpenText AppWorks, specifically in the Indian market, is reasonable, but I'm not aware if it's still reasonable outside of India. The licensing cost is based on the number of licenses and the number of users. OpenText AppWorks has different licensing options."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
13%
Insurance Company
6%
Government
6%
Insurance Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
7%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business43
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Large Enterprise3
 

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 OpenText AppWorks?
We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenTex...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenText AppWorks?
From an enterprise point, their pricing is a little bit crazy because they don't have a SaaS model. They have to go with a perpetual model, which makes it look crazy initially. But over a period, i...
What needs improvement with OpenText AppWorks?
They can improve the UI capability. Recently, they launched a low-code platform, called entity modeling, which they can enhance further. It would be beneficial if OpenText ( /products/data-express-...
 

Also Known As

Camunda BPM
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo 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
Red Deer County, DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance, Bangkok Airways, PBS, CIZ (Netherlands Ministry of Health), The Dutch Ministry of Defence, Mercer
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda vs. OpenText Process Automation and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.