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

NICE Robotic Automation vs Software AG ARIS Robotic Process Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

NICE Robotic Automation
Ranking in Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
23rd
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Software AG ARIS Robotic Pr...
Ranking in Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
41st
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
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 NICE Robotic Automation is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Software AG ARIS Robotic Process Automation is 0.2%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Robotic Process Automation (RPA)
 

Featured Reviews

Harish G V - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 9, 2023
Quicker compared to other bots but not very user-friendly
There is a need for NICE to be more user-friendly. It should be designed in such a way that any developer can easily develop bots. For instance, Power Automate provides a good example of a user-friendly design that NICE can learn from. Moreover, in terms of documentation, there is very little available for NICE, making it challenging to implement the bots. So, documentation should be improved as well. There are a lot of additional features that could be included in NICE. As the NICE Robotic Automation claims, it is a low-code solution, but that is not entirely true. They need to concentrate on the prerequisites and building blocks. There should be more options available internally that are easy to use and well-developed.
Use Software AG ARIS Robotic Process Automation?
Share your opinion

Quotes from Members

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As per my understanding, UiPath has a much lesser cost than NICE, but I am not sure."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions are best for your needs.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Educational Organization
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about NICE Robotic Automation?
Through interfaces called Callout (created with HTML code) it is possible to create a strong interactivity with the user. These interfaces can be extremely dynamic in relation to the behavior of a ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NICE Robotic Automation?
In the configuration phase, you need to have a certain degree of knowledge of Windows and Linux environments. That said, the wizards and manuals are of good quality. For the price, I would say that...
What needs improvement with NICE Robotic Automation?
There is nothing so relevant to complain about except a few more options in the debug monitor (which is already very powerful and useful right now). There are a few areas for improvement in the ins...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
ARIS Robotic Process Automation, ARIS RPA
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

HelpLine, Telefonica Spain, Banca Popolare Di Sondrio
ARIS serves customers across all industries and of every size worldwide. Companies trust ARIS as the market leader for process excellence with more than 30 years of experience in the market, 10 million users worldwide, from 1 user companies to the Fortune 500.
Find out what your peers are saying about UiPath, Microsoft, Automation Anywhere and others in Robotic Process Automation (RPA). Updated: October 2024.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.