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

SS&C Blue Prism vs ServiceNow Now Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 12, 2025

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

ServiceNow Now Platform
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (11th), No-Code Development Platforms (3rd)
SS&C Blue Prism
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
25th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (21st), Business Process Management (BPM) (32nd), Process Automation (26th), Medical Insurance Claims Software (3rd), Insurance Claims Processing (5th), Document Management Software (15th), Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (14th), Loan Management Software (2nd), Document Automation Software (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Low-Code Development Platforms category, the mindshare of ServiceNow Now Platform is 2.0%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SS&C Blue Prism is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Low-Code Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Fabio QUINTANILHA - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows for seamless integration and sharing of common features
The initial setup is straightforward. There are limited access. If you choose not to use scripts, you can still configure the majority of the settings on the platform. The technical aspect of implementing changes is governed by change management processes. Even simple features require careful consideration of communication, documentation, and governance. Despite the setup being relatively straightforward and typically taking one to two weeks to complete once the desired outcome is identified, the implementation phase can often extend for a month or two due to various factors. I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.
Gavin Beckett - PeerSpot reviewer
Design studio enables effective automation while licensing needs improvement
I noticed that it lacks the ability to automatically record the process steps like some of its competitors. Having this capability could accelerate the process. The delivery methodology felt somewhat waterfall in style and not sufficiently agile. Additionally, the licensing model was somewhat prohibitive. It was not developed in a consumption-based manner, however, rather in a fixed-price licensing model that did not account for volumes.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We work on it directly to send out tickets. It enables us to work seamlessly, we don't need to send them out manually. We can create a ticket and assign it in the system."
"The most valuable features are the ease of use, stability, and the ability to change or upgrade seamlessly."
"The main reason that people use ServiceNow is that performance is very good."
"The workflow feature really has a lot of value because you can create complex workflows in a simple, intuitive way with only a few clicks."
"It is a scalable and a stable platform."
"The most valuable feature of the ServiceNow Now Platform is the workspaces feature, which allows you to create customized workspaces."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"The tool is generally easy to use, making it a very user-friendly product."
"Some important features include the language capabilities, which are crucial since RPA has to read the documents provided by the customer."
"I find the design studio, where I can build the automation, and the control room feature, which allows me to run and monitor the automation, to be the most useful."
"The key feature of SS&C that I find valuable is the general workflow visibility."
 

Cons

"The tool has a lot of limitations."
"ServiceNow Now Platform's automation process needs improvement."
"ServiceNow Now Platform's technical support needs to improve."
"When it comes to integration, it can be complex compared to other tools I'm currently using."
"What I didn't like in the ServiceNow Now Platform is testing, particularly with Visual Studio. It had a bad integration with Visual Studio because you can't compile and run it from there. You have to debug on your own and then find out where the error is through test scripts. The testing component in the ServiceNow Now Platform isn't that great. What I'd like to see in the next version of the ServiceNow Now Platform is an improvement in testing and writing scripts, and if there was a feature to just run it from the modules, then that would be great, instead of finding the error manually and checking where it is."
"This platform is used more by large companies because it is a little bit expensive."
"The UI and mobile UI need to be improved."
"I feel that the solution's user interface is an area with certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"Blue Prism is more costly than UiPath in terms of robotic licenses and orchestrators."
"There is a need for improved integration with external systems in SS&C."
"I noticed that it lacks the ability to automatically record the process steps like some of its competitors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Price-wise, I would describe the product's cost to be more than the average, but it compensates for that with the functionalities that it provides."
"ServiceNow is not open source, so there is a license you must pay. As for how much it costs, what I have observed is that it often depends on your subscriptions."
"The product is very expensive."
"The solution is expensive."
"It is expensive only."
"Pricing is based on the number of users and user licenses, but the product is 20% to 30% more than the competition."
"The price of the product falls on the higher side of the spectrum."
"The pricing of this solution is done annually and it is very expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Low-Code Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
16%
Insurance Company
13%
Construction Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ServiceNow Now Platform?
The integration with other tools is pretty good.
What needs improvement with ServiceNow Now Platform?
The analytics should be more readily available on the base product. Historical data isn't as easily available as expected and it requires buying additional licenses for more features.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SS&C Blue Prism?
The pricing was not particularly competitive. It wasn't flexible for different geographies. For instance, in Africa, they didn't have a different pricing model to account for affordability. The pri...
What needs improvement with SS&C Blue Prism?
I noticed that it lacks the ability to automatically record the process steps like some of its competitors. Having this capability could accelerate the process. The delivery methodology felt somewh...
What is your primary use case for SS&C Blue Prism?
I use this solution to automate repetitive manual tasks, typically in back-office service industries.
 

Also Known As

No data available
SS&C AWD
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

experian, beachbody, health partners
AWS, EY, Deloitte, ABBYY, Microsoft, GLYNT.AI, Pfizer, Invesco, Western Union
Find out what your peers are saying about SS&C Blue Prism vs. ServiceNow Now Platform and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.