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

NICE Robotic Automation vs OpenText Operations Orchestration comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
8.0
Automate saves time and resources, achieving ROI quickly by reducing manual tasks and IT staff needs through automation.
Sentiment score
8.0
Organizations saw improved customer experience and efficiency, achieving significant ROI and savings, supported by NICE Robotic Automation.
Sentiment score
8.6
OpenText Operations Orchestration saves costs and time, reducing workloads and increasing productivity with a 40% efficiency improvement.
Fortra's Automate has effectively replaced the workload of an entire employee, saving us significant time and money.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Automate customer service is praised for responsive, effective support despite occasional communication issues, with knowledgeable and helpful staff.
Sentiment score
7.2
NICE Robotic Automation offers efficient customer support, resolving most issues swiftly, despite occasional scheduling challenges for assistance.
Sentiment score
6.1
OpenText Operations Orchestration's customer and technical support can be inconsistent, with users experiencing varying levels of service quality.
They don't always understand the processes I'm trying to implement.
They are very responsive and have been able to resolve any issues I have encountered.
I would rate the technical support as a nine out of ten because it is quite fast and courteous.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.0
Automate offers scalable, cost-effective deployment with support for load balancing and high availability, although scaling complexity exists.
Sentiment score
6.1
Opinions on scalability vary, with adaptability praised but concerns about licensing costs and infrastructure constraints noted.
Sentiment score
7.4
OpenText Operations Orchestration is praised for scalability, handling large architectures seamlessly, and supporting diverse, extensive server networks without downtime.
It is easy to increase one bot or one studio without needing to buy another orchestrator, which can be quite expensive.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.0
Automate is praised for stability and performance, despite occasional errors, connectivity issues, and recommendations for server improvements.
Sentiment score
6.0
NICE Robotic Automation is stable and robust, but some users report initial stability issues and recommend cautious implementation.
Sentiment score
7.0
OpenText Operations Orchestration's stability has improved, achieving over 90% success despite minor customization and event remediation challenges.
The stability of Fortra's Automate is excellent.
It has very robust features, and it is not prone to instability.
 

Room For Improvement

Users seek improvements in web automation, UI, security, OCR, integration, documentation, stability, AI, cloud functionality, and community access.
NICE Robotic Automation needs a user-friendly web-based interface, improved connectivity, low-code alignment, and comprehensive licensing options.
OpenText Operations Orchestration needs better integration, scalability, a modern interface, cloud options, open-source support, and pre-built workflows.
Integration with Amazon S3 is somewhat lacking.
I would prefer not having to log in to update a ticket; being able to respond via email would be beneficial.
I find that most important features are strong, however, there is a lack of good development for artificial intelligence, such as machine learning.
 

Setup Cost

Automate offers a cost-effective, scalable pricing model with lower costs per bot, unlike UiPath and Blue Prism.
NICE Robotic Automation offers competitive perpetual licenses, eliminating yearly renewals, requiring Windows and Linux knowledge for configuration.
OpenText Operations Orchestration is seen as costly but offers significant value through cost and time-saving automation capabilities.
Competitors are often more expensive than Automate.
It offered what we wanted at a good, competitive price.
It does a lot but also costs a lot.
 

Valuable Features

Automate offers easy task development and integration with AI resources, efficiently handling tasks with strong support for secure transfers.
NICE Robotic Automation excels in customizable desktop automation, reusable features, API connectivity, and secure data handling across platforms.
OpenText Operations Orchestration streamlines automation with easy integration, centralized management, and flexible features, reducing deployment time significantly.
Automate's non-reliance on additional orchestrators makes it quite cost-effective.
The most valuable features of Fortra's Automate include its FTP functionality and file manipulation capabilities.
I really like the API functionality; it's a slick aspect of the solution when I'm using it.
 

Categories and Ranking

Automate
Sponsored
Ranking in Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NICE Robotic Automation
Ranking in Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
32nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Operations Orchest...
Ranking in Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
21st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Robotic Process Automation (RPA) category, the mindshare of Automate is 1.5%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NICE Robotic Automation is 0.6%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Operations Orchestration is 0.2%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
 

Featured Reviews

Anabel Marco - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates processes efficiently with cost-effective scaling and robust customer support
Web scraping is quite good since it offers a lot of possibilities. Another important feature for me is its compatibility with MBI, the Power that is ISEQUADO Centers. I appreciate the ability to scale and increase the number of bots or studios without additional expense. Automate's non-reliance on additional orchestrators makes it quite cost-effective.
Sigal Svilim - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides great automation features that save us time and money
We use this solution for our customer representatives and also for robotic automation. We primarily use this NICE product for making automation processes. I'm the Chief Information Officer and we are customers of NICE.  Robotic Automation has saved us time and money by moving our processes away…
Ahmed Salman - PeerSpot reviewer
Increases productivity with automation and robust orchestration capabilities
The community is very powerful, with extensive knowledge bases available. There are ready-made workflows, integration with other products, a nice user interface, and reporting. The tool is flexible, agent-based or agentless. It allows significant automation and has robust orchestration and reporting capabilities. It is easy to configure and use, leading to increased efficiency across our IT processes.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Computer Software Company
24%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about HelpSystems AutoMate?
We use it for specific cases, mainly secure file transfers, which are vital for us. And it works for us.
What is your primary use case for HelpSystems AutoMate?
I am a consultant and I am making a lot of processes in human resources, payroll, certifications, trainings, web scra...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortra Automate?
The pricing is quite good compared to its competitors. Competitors are often more expensive than Automate. I would ra...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Operations Orchestration?
The pricing is medium, and the automation helps in cost and time savings, resulting in substantial value for money.
What needs improvement with Operations Orchestration?
I would prefer the addition of ready-made workflows for common scenarios such as Oracle database switchovers or Excha...
What advice do you have for others considering Operations Orchestration?
This tool serves as a central management hub, allowing seamless control of various IT processes via one console. I ra...
 

Also Known As

HelpSystems Automate, Automate
No data available
Micro Focus Operations Orchestration, Operations Orchestration, HPOO, HPE Operations Orchestration
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aldergrove Financial Group, Preferred Health Professionals, Mindbeam Technologies, First Credit Union in British Columbia, Vestcom International, Prime Liberty Benefits, University of Tampa, CNLBancshares, World Precision Instruments, BJ's Restaurants, Globe Pequot Press, Accudata Technologies, Norton Healthcare, Pacific Toxicology Laboratories
HelpLine, Telefonica Spain, Banca Popolare Di Sondrio
Casablanca INT, Internet Initiative Japan, Railway Information Systems, Samsung SDS, and Turkcell.
Find out what your peers are saying about NICE Robotic Automation vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.