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

Microsoft Power Automate vs OpenText Robotic Process Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Power Automate
Ranking in Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.9
Number of Reviews
125
Ranking in other categories
Process Mining (2nd)
OpenText Robotic Process Au...
Ranking in Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
36th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Robotic Process Automation (RPA) category, the mindshare of Microsoft Power Automate is 21.2%, down from 21.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Robotic Process Automation is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
 

Featured Reviews

Gowtham J - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides valuable integration with other Microsoft tools
The initial setup process involves three trigger points. One is a manual trigger, where users interact with a button or interface element to start the flow. The second is the recurrence trigger, which allows users to schedule automated maintenance at a specific time. Third is a data-driven trigger, where the flow is initiated based on an event in a database, such as creating a new line item in SharePoint database. Once triggered, the flow continues to execute, performing the configured actions and providing the results.
Hugo Almeida - PeerSpot reviewer
It lets us automate almost anything and is very easy to work with
It currently supports only on-premises deployments. They can include support for cloud deployments. It should provide us the ability to choose a robot for executing a workflow. We want to control which robot executes a certain workflow. Right now, it automatically chooses the robot that is going to execute our workflow. It should also provide the ability to get filters on the outputs of the steps. We have each workflow as a step, and each step has some output. We would like to have the functionality to execute some script or some logic on these outputs to format the tests directly on the variables.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is pretty customizable. Even big automation tasks are done rather simply."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Microsoft Power Automate is very easy to use."
"Its integration with the Office 365 ecosystem is most valuable. We use a lot of ready-to-use templates."
"The best feature is that it doesn't require any other connectivity."
"In just in one click, we can see any documentation, etc., that we need. It makes it very easy to navigate."
"I use the product for automation."
"The connectors are a very good feature."
"It lets us automate almost anything, even with the legacy tools. It is very easy for us now to automate with legacy tools, which used to be difficult earlier. We work with a lot of other automation tools from Micro Focus, such as Operation Orchestration, but these tools can only connect to the API. So, there was a gap when we wanted to automate older and legacy tools that didn't have any API to connect to. We can now also automate without any changes in the customer environment. We don't need to change anything in the way that the customer environment works."
 

Cons

"All the services on the Microsoft platform are great. If we want to try something like with SharePoint or Azure or the 365 CRM, then we can't with the everyday community edition of the Microsoft Power Automate. It would be a good thing if there was some sort of trial period. Let's say you have 14 days. That way, can log into the loading screen with Power Automate, and get to utilize services like SharePoint, OneDrive, 365 CRM or etc. to see if they like them. It would be a good way for Microsoft to cross-sell or up-sell."
"There are two versions of the automation suite. You've got your cloud functionality, and you have got your on-premises functionality for legacy systems. There are a lot of functionalities between the two systems that don't cross-correlate with each other. A lot of the functionality in the cloud system is not there on the production side in the on-prem system. If they could implement some of the similar functionalities and streamline them for integration, it would be a lot easier. There should be seamless integration between the two systems."
"It would be good to have some kind of on-premises solution for BPMN users, but I don't think Microsoft will ever go back to the on-premises solution. They all train their clients to use their online services. It is easy, but it doesn't follow the industry-wide standards. I can only use the processes that Microsoft gives us. I can't map a business process by using other standards or notations, such as Business Process Management (BPM). I have to use whatever Microsoft gives us. I would like to have support for some standards because if we decide to use another BPM tomorrow, we will have to remap everything in notation to transfer from this solution. This is the only block or obstacle that I see in using this solution. It is closed in its infrastructure."
"Microsoft Power Automate's basic activities are not strong."
"The tool must be more stable."
"They can build more templates and more connectivity with other platforms. They can provide a more user-friendly way to connect with other platforms. They have their own in-built plugins for certain third-party vendors, but there are still a lot of third-party vendors that are not there."
"In an upcoming release, the exception handling mechanism could improve. The issue that we are facing is whenever there is a failure in any of the middle execution and if you wanted to navigate it to the end of the last line of execution, we do not have this feature available. If we had this feature it would make it even more stable."
"The thing which needs the most improvement is really the documentation. It should have better details of the processes."
"It currently supports only on-premises deployments. They can include support for cloud deployments. It should provide us the ability to choose a robot for executing a workflow. We want to control which robot executes a certain workflow. Right now, it automatically chooses the robot that is going to execute our workflow. It should also provide the ability to get filters on the outputs of the steps. We have each workflow as a step, and each step has some output. We would like to have the functionality to execute some script or some logic on these outputs to format the tests directly on the variables."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing two to three out of ten."
"It's more fragmented licensing, where every little thing that you add, you get an extra license cost."
"You pay for use and if you want a premium connector or adapter, but a lot of things are available for free."
"With our Microsoft Office 365 license, we are able to use Microsoft Power Automate."
"I am not aware of the recent pricing model, but during the time that I was using this solution is was reasonable."
"This solution is bundled with our Office 365, so there is no additional licensing fee."
"I believe one of the advantages of this device is its low cost."
"There are many different ways to license it."
"The pricing model is very straightforward. You can have a one-year or three-year subscription. You pay for each robot that you want to use simultaneously. If you want, you can install 50 robots and get 50 licenses. If you want to use only one robot at a time, you just need one license. For each license, you pay around 10% or 15% to support. You pay for the license, and you pay a small percentage of the cost of the license for support. This is their licensing model, which is very easy to understand."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
21%
Insurance Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
How is Automation Anywhere compared to Microsoft Power Automate?
‌Neither‌ ‌solution‌ ‌requires‌ ‌any‌ ‌coding‌ ‌experience,‌ ‌and‌ ‌both‌ ‌are‌ ‌easy‌ ‌to‌ ‌use‌ ‌and‌ ‌have‌ ‌great‌ ‌drag-and‌ ‌drop‌ ‌functionality.‌ ‌The‌ ‌training‌ ‌and‌ ‌resources‌ ‌for‌ ‌A...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Power Automate, Microsoft Flow, MS Power Automate, WinAutomation by Softomotive, ProcessRobot by Softomotive, Minit
Micro Focus Robotic Process Automation, Micro Focus RPA
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Coca-Cola 2. General Electric 3. Siemens 4. Accenture 5. Deloitte 6. Johnson & Johnson 7. Ford 8. Nestle 9. Procter & Gamble 10. IBM 11. Amazon 12. Google 13. Microsoft 14. Adobe 15. Cisco 16. Oracle 17. SAP 18. Intel 19. HP 20. Dell 21. Verizon 22. AT&T 23. T-Mobile 24. Walmart 25. Target 26. Home Depot 27. McDonald's 28. Starbucks 29. Nike 30. Apple 31. Facebook 32. Twitter
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about UiPath, Microsoft, Automation Anywhere and others in Robotic Process Automation (RPA). Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.