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

HyperScience vs UiPath Platform 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

HyperScience
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (8th)
UiPath Platform
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
911
Ranking in other categories
Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (1st), Agentic Automation (2nd), AI-Agent Builders (1st), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (1st), AI Finance & Accounting (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

Satender Sajwan - PeerSpot reviewer
Operations Manager at Genpact
Gave a better output every time, reduced our touch time by 80%, and had a robust reporting mechanism to improve the process
We tested HyperScience on structured formats of the forms, and it worked really well. We tested it with semi-structured formats, and it worked well. We also tested creating a new form that does not have any format. HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability. Such a capability would make it a perfect system for processes like data entry, accounts tables, etc. Secondly, before putting the actual volume in the tool, I believe that we have to create a manual form every time. If the procedure of creating the forms can be shortened or automated, it would help. It would reduce the manual effort of creating a form every time you start working on it. There should be an automated form creation system that does not require any manual intervention. Whenever a new form comes, the system should be able to create a dummy form for that. That will help.
reviewer2761431 - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager Rpa at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Significantly reduces manual effort and improves team workflows through automated ticketing
We've used Agent Builder, IXP, and Maestro for orchestration. We have created context-grounded searches or chatbots using context grounding, and we also use context grounding within an Agentic flow where a bot or agent reads ServiceNow tickets to determine whether it has been assigned to the right work group. If it has not been assigned correctly due to human error, it automatically reassigns it to the right group. I would assess Agentic AI's ability to extract data points as effective. We created an agent for the purpose of extracting data, though not in a document. We created what we call an email conversation agent that engages with a customer, vendor, or someone in an email conversation with a set goal of extracting specific data points for an action to be performed subsequently. The one automation we have deployed in production involves the agent interacting with team members to collect data points and create a ServiceNow ticket. We appreciate almost all features of UiPath Platform, with one of the most successful ones being the use of Coms Mining. Most of the new features related to AI have all been good, and we use Agentic. We have already created a few agents and have started to use Maestro for a few flows, though we are not yet there to orchestrate an end-to-end workflow. We have good ROI from the automations we have developed with UiPath Platform, which far exceeds the investment in the platform. It has saved us tens of thousands of hours in manual effort, making the team members happy to pursue other things of value.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"The most valuable features of UiPath are test automation, test suite, test manager, and document understanding."
"The quick delivery is good, and the solution is easy to use."
"I like the low-code/no-code approach and the graphical interface. Among all the RPA tools, UiPath is the one with the easiest interface."
"The product is well-integrated with different tools that can help with logging, et cetera."
"I find the ease of building automation in UiPath valuable. It's easier to do that in UiPath versus other platforms, such as Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere."
"One of the most important features of UiPath is the transactional basis of how it works. I can see which ones are successful, which ones are not, and then have the bot take care of 98% of it. Our staff only deal with the exceptions and this has led to greater job satisfaction."
"UiPath has the simplest low-code user interface that I've seen in my professional life."
"UiPath allows people to do more value-added work. I found that we were able to take a person well versed in access programming and convert them to be an RPA developer with relative ease."
 

Cons

"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"The error handling is in need of improvement. We'd had a problem tracking when errors occur, and troubleshooting how things are captured in production."
"Usually, what happens is whenever we talk to a business stakeholder, the first concern is data security. And the moment that you talk about a bot in an unattended fashion going and reading the data source, concerns arise since there's not much control at a certain point."
"They need to improve features around legacy systems."
"I've submitted feedback to UiPath, including a suggestion to improve the slow mainframe connection currently limited to a 300ms timeout."
"I would like to see anything that can increase the reliability of the processes."
"I would like to see more features included in the AI Fabric."
"The reporting part of Orchestrator could be improved. For example, UiPath could automatically email us if there are errors. Adding this feature would help us."
"We'd like the upgrades to be a bit easier and more flexible."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think HyperScience is cheaper when compared to other tools. They also have a lifetime licensing option."
"I don't have any idea about the licensing costs, but I know that there was a per-page charge. They had different models of pricing. One of them was based on the minimum number of pages, and we had a fixed price. So, the price model depends on the volume that is coming through HyperScience."
"The solution's pricing is a challenge. Every time I go to renew my contract, the prices increase. It is getting expensive."
"The pricing is good compared to other software. Based on the features that UiPath is providing, and the community support, the price is reasonable."
"If it can be lower, we will always take lower."
"UiPath's licensing costs can be high, and to maximize their value, customers need a clear plan for utilization."
"The licensing system is something that needs to be improved."
"As compared to the competition, its pricing is on the higher side. However, looking at the services you are getting, it is justified. It allows you to cater to more use cases."
"We got purchased the basic minimum package and it was around $35,000 USD, annually."
"Traditionally, Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism are the biggest things competing against UiPath. Those are usually what most of the clients lean towards, if they see a cheaper licensing option. Clients choose UiPath because it's easier to deploy and learn within their teams."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions are best for your needs.
881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Performing Arts
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business249
Midsize Enterprise143
Large Enterprise667
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Best RPA tools for IBM iSeries
I can only speak to UiPath since that is the only RPA solution that I have used. I know that there are specific packages that you can integrate into your project that is specifically made to work w...
RPA that Bots can run without centralized control?
Yes, Attended Bots which can run without centralized control Module. RPA Tools like Automation Anywhere, uiPath ,Power Automation they do support this.
How do I choose between UiPath and Microsoft Power Automate?
Microsoft‌ ‌Power‌ ‌Automate‌ ‌is‌ ‌intuitive‌ ‌and‌ ‌easy‌ ‌to‌ ‌integrate‌ ‌and‌ ‌use.‌ ‌I‌ ‌like‌ ‌that‌ ‌there‌ ‌is‌ ‌no‌ ‌coding‌ ‌experience‌ ‌necessary,‌ ‌and‌ ‌appreciate‌ ‌the‌ ‌automated‌...
 

Also Known As

No data available
UiPath Maestro, UiPath Apps, UiPath Agent Builder
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hyperscience's customers are some of the top enterprises in the Insurance, Government, Financial Services, and Healthcare industries.
1. Accenture 2. Deloitte 3. PwC 4. IBM 5. Capgemini 6. KPMG 7. Ernst & Young 8. Infosys 9. Cognizant 10. Wipro 11. Tata Consultancy Services 12. HCL Technologies 13. Genpact 14. Tech Mahindra 15. DXC Technology 16. Atos 17. NTT Data 18. CGI 19. L&T Infotech 20. Hexaware Technologies 21. Mindtree 22. Mphasis 23. Virtusa 24. Syntel 25. Zensar Technologies 26. WNS Global Services 27. Hexaware Technologies 28. Larsen & Toubro Infotech 29. Persistent Systems 30. QuEST Global 31. Sonata Software 32. Zensar Technologies
Find out what your peers are saying about HyperScience vs. UiPath Platform and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.