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

TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM vs WebRatio 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

TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
32nd
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WebRatio
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
62nd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is 0.5%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WebRatio is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Ray Ochieng - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful workflow definition enhances operational stability and efficiency
TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is powerful for defining workflows. It is low code, so you don't need a lot of coding, and tasks are just drag and drop. It is also very stable as we haven't had issues with it going down or encountering any operational issues for a long time. The stability and rich features in workflow definition make it a valuable tool.
reviewer1485573 - PeerSpot reviewer
Little coding needed and speeds development time but lacks documentation
The maintenance aspect is too heavy. Moving from one version to the other made the solution change, and not in a way that we liked. Typically there are documents about the release of new versions and a set of activities required to migrate from one to the other. This time, it was very messy. There were issues surrounding the management of the release. This could potentially be due to the fact that WebRation, in the past, had started to make some choices regarding the framework and architecture that were changed later. In the past, we'd use a strategy as the environment, as an architectural pattern for the application. Now, it's moving more on the spring framework and this initiated some change that obviously had an impact on our application. It's caused a problem with maintenance. The solution seems to have changed its approach. Now, it's more related to a federative application environment in a monolithic aspect. While the solution was interesting at one point, everything is moving towards the cloud. WebRatio should be moving also in the web approach. Currently, you have to install an environment inside the desktop. The future is the cloud. Normally with a low code environment, there is a VPN notation - maybe a WebML or FML notation. If they can move in to have an environment that has a running machine at the end, it would be great. Obviously, some components on the server-side should be deliberate. Normally it's the model you control that's step-by-step and has a very simple flow. In the digital environment, in the organization, the process is more complex. The quality of the documentation and the community surrounding the product are poor. They need to give users more documentation and build up the surrounding community. As it isn't a well-known product, it's hard to find professionals to work with it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is the best product because of its stability. ActiveMatrix 5.x is highly stable in production, and the downtime is very low. I have worked on a lot of service projects, and the engine is very stable, robust, and scalable. The development and change requests can be pushed quickly, and the mapper activity and SSLT kind of features are also good. It is easy to do changes, testing, and deployment. Its deployment is very easy, and we can automate a lot of scripts for our on-premises solution. I work for an investment bank, and we have automated a lot of processes for our customers. Previously, we used to develop scripts and tools. With version 6.x, everything is moved to Maven and other things. Environment handling is done mostly through DevOps tools. As compared to Mulesoft, the deployment and configuration are very easy in TIBCO."
"TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is powerful for defining workflows."
"The capacity for distributing the jobs in a workflow is an important feature."
"TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is powerful for defining workflows."
"For specific situations this can be a good solution and a simplified interface to work with."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"The scheduling and the calendar are very useful."
"The initial setup isn't too complex."
 

Cons

"ActiveMatrix is in the middle field. MuleDB is more on the engineering side with Java and other things. SnapLogic is there are on the higher side with very low coding. TIBCO stays in the middle like IBM or Oracle. TIBCO can move towards IBM's way of doing. IBM has a big market and many varieties of products and good integration, which TIBCO doesn't have. It can have better integration. TIBCO's transition to the cloud is a little slow. As compared to Dell, Boomi, and Mulesoft. TIBCO took the steps a little later. TIBCO's ID was far better and easier to work with previously. TIBCO's 5.x ID was very good, and the development environment and the transition were easy. Version 6.5 onwards, it is a stable product, but it would be good if they can do something similar to version 5.4 with version 6. They should concentrate on this API market. It will give them the strength and the ability to grab the market back."
"My experience with tech support has not been very good. Most of the time, issues are escalated to level three, where they are either unresolved or take two weeks to address."
"The product is missing some means of addressing more complex BPM constructs and should interface with more platforms easily."
"The scalability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The maintenance of the package could be improved."
"It is not lightweight and requires a lot of disk space, memory, and CPU."
"Technical support needs to be streamlined."
"The maintenance aspect is too heavy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is an expensive tool compared to others."
"There are some discussions about perpetual licenses and conversions, but I'm not much familiar with them."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
47%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
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 TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM?
The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.
What needs improvement with TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM?
It is not lightweight and requires a lot of disk space, memory, and CPU. Making it lightweight so it can run on a minimum processor and less memory would be beneficial. Additionally, the current wo...
What is your primary use case for TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM?
We are using TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM for network deployment workflows. For example, if a customer is interested in getting a NetWorker, there is a workflow where we log in, get the customer details,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ADIS, Citi, Bank of Montreal, First Citizens Bank
Unicredit Leasing, Acer, Gruppo Torinese Transporti, A2A, SET Distribuzone, Dolomiti Energia, AIM Gruppo, IFC CNA_ Amsa
Find out what your peers are saying about TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM vs. WebRatio and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.