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

IBM BPM 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

IBM BPM
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (6th), Process Automation (6th)
IBM Case Foundation
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
31st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of IBM BPM is 5.3%, down from 7.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Case Foundation is 0.5%, 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 (%)
IBM BPM5.3%
IBM Case Foundation0.5%
Other94.2%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Ateeq Rehman - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation platforms streamline processes and offer flexibility, but AI integration and version upgrades pose challenges
In the technology world, there is always room for improvement. Technologies evolve day by day, especially with the emergence of artificial intelligence and generative AI models. Although IBM BPM is a substantial product, adopting and integrating new technologies quickly is not easy due to the migration and upgrade paths involved. Every time new versions are released, we face business and production challenges that make rapid adoption challenging. The main concern bothering me today regarding IBM BPM is the integration of AI components.
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

"It is transparent to business users because it is mostly picture based modelling."
"The integration and design are valuable features."
"They have some quick-win programs that are designed to come in, they'll bring a developer in and they'll work with your developer to get you started. That's what we did and that worked really great. We got an understanding of the product, we got an understanding of how to deploy the product. And when we were done with that engagement, we were off and running."
"Automating the whole workflow process to give our data steward the ability to take actions rapidly, and making sure we have all the data synced within the different platforms that we are using."
"By automating several tasks, we have already reduced a lot of work for the business."
"IBM BPM should become cloud-native. It should also add a cloud deployment feature."
"Overall, I'm satisfied with the product. If you compare it with other products, it's probably not as easygoing or as simple to implement as the rest. But after you get used to it, it works. It has a lot of capabilities and potential, but the people, who come from different technologies, have some difficulty getting used to the way of working with IBM products."
"IBM BPM is easy to deploy."
"It is easy to set up workflows that notify the user depending on certain events."
"The only thing is that we can easily track where the application is in the process, from manual to automation."
"The content management is great."
"The most valuable feature is the content manager part of the file as it is very stable, robust, and reliable."
"The most valuable feature is its stability, which is why we are using it."
"Case Foundation provides a strong security boost."
"A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting."
"It provides us the capability of producing b​​usiness processes for documents that are launched immediately when a document comes into the repository."
 

Cons

"IBM BPM integrated with Spark UI and the UI is now much better, but they still need to improve the UI because competitors have predefined templates and other additional features. In these competitor's solutions, you are able to use the templates, map your data, and the form is ready to use. With this solution, you need to write a lot of code to have the same quality as the competitor's templates. It would be a benefit to make this platform more towards low-code or no-code."
"From the testing perspective and minor enhancements perspective, customization is something that is a little tedious as compared to new tools. In addition, various open-source tools that are available are not working with IBM BPM."
"One area for improvement is the scripting languages used within the solution. They could integrate other languages such as GoMango or Python than JavaScript."
"The configuration is not that easy, and the initial deployment took three months."
"It's a bit technical, related to the instance of migrations. It's a tough thing to handle, in every new release, in every upgrade, that we have to do things in the applications or in the product. I think IBM is working on it but I know there are a lot of requests coming in from different organizations on this."
"The initial setup can be tricky because IBM BPM is not based on a popular stack, and it's difficult to hire a developer for this product."
"I would like to see more inclusion of RPA technologies. If we have more manual processes, we can use robotic process automation and integrate that in with the solution."
"The options for customization could be improved. More customization using your own code would be beneficial."
"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 service as it currently stands is out-of-date and lacks flexibility."
"There are some features that could be enhanced like the document viewer"
"The interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"90% of the feedback we receive states that the UI is not very user-friendly."
"The cloud version could use more stability."
"​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.​"
"Comparing the solution with other interfaces, IBM BPM is much better than Case Foundation. They need to make this solution's interface more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I wish it was less expensive. I don't know why their pricing model is so high for a piece of software that could benefit so many. It just seems to me that they could have a lower cost, maybe with fewer features or whatever, but it should be possible to do a lower cost workflow software that uses the same interface and underlying engine but does not cost so much that you have to be a Fortune 50 company to buy it. It is annoying to me. There are a lot of solutions that IBM has that are really powerful but nobody can afford them. They know their business, but I still feel that there are a lot of customers who would benefit from this sort of thing. I don't know what this elitism is all about. I am sure they have people doing the money numbers, but it seems like you can make a lot more money by selling it to way more people for a little bit less."
"When considering the features of the solution the price is expensive compared to competitors."
"Starting out with Express can also help reduce the cost for adopting the product."
"I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
"Licensing is managed by the client, but we know it is yearly. Camunda is relatively cheaper. There is not much difference in pricing of IBM and PEGA. For large licensing, there are discounts as well."
"IBM BPM is expensive, so most large companies opt for IBM based on their licensing options."
"IBM BPM cannot be considered a cheaply priced product. IBM BPM is a really expensive product compared to other companies. One needs to opt for the perpetual licensing model offered by IBM."
"The solution might be expensive, but I can't give you a precise number. In the market here, I've seen two main products for BPM: IBM BPM and Camunda. Camunda is very popular and open-source, so there's no direct comparison."
"Pricing is in the mid-range, it is not cheap, but it's not expensive."
"IBM Case Foundation is a little expensive."
"This is not an expensive solution and we are using the standard license."
"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.
872,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise71
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better, IBM BPM or IBM Business Automation Workflow?
We researched both IBM solutions and in the end, we chose Business Automation Workflow. IBM BPM has a good user interface and the BPM coach is a helpful tool. The API is very useful in providing en...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM BPM?
Once it is installed, maintaining it is not a big issue.
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?
The tool is expensive for my customers; it is very expensive, more than other solutions. Some customers say it is more expensive. The license cost for Cloud Pak is per user and increases with the n...
What needs improvement with IBM Case Foundation?
We face some challenges with IBM Case Foundation from our customers, particularly with administration and configuration. We face many issues and open tickets with IBM regarding that, especially som...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Lombardi Edition, IBM Business Process Manager, IBM WebSphere Process Server
Case Foundation, FileNet Business Process Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Barclays, EmeriCon, Banca Popolare di Milano, CST Consulting, KeyBank, KPMG, Prolifics, Sandhata Technologies Ltd., State of Alaska, Humana S.A., Saperion, esciris, Banco Espirito Santo
Suncorp Group Limited
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM BPM vs. IBM Case Foundation and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
872,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.