IQ Bot Reviews

We have automated several processes for several customers. We have used this tool to automate processes for a bank. We have also set it up for another customer to download purchase orders and put information in a database to consolidate the information they have in the SAP system.

After automating a process, we prepare a report that shows how much money automation has saved. IQ Bot has reduced costs, and there are fewer mistakes because humans make mistakes. 

These bots also work 24/7, which is also a big benefit. Earlier, if a task took a week, with IQ Bot, we can do the same task in 30 minutes or so depending on the amount of information.

It is very easy to set up and use this tool to get information from documents. It can get the information about the purchase order number, average, description of purchase orders in several formats without any problem.

It should have more artificial intelligence to capture information from a document. Currently, our clients are preparing invoices manually. They are not digital, so we need to scan all the documents, but we are facing issues in capturing all the information through IQ Bot. Therefore, we have to use other tools to capture the information, and then we use IQ Bot to process all the information. They need to improve the artificial intelligence for document scanning.

I have been using this solution for around one year.

It is stable. We had no issues with its stability.

It is scalable. We have implemented it in a medium company as well as in a large company without any problem. It only depends on the server on which you run the bot.

Their technical support is fine. We don't have any problem with the support of Automation Anywhere.

Its initial setup is easy. It takes one week to create the processes and then develop, test, and put them in production.

We have a team of four people for supporting a big customer with this solution. They monitor the processes and check if there is any problem. We support all the bots that we develop.

Our customers evaluate UiPath and Power Automate.

I would recommend this solution because it is very easy to implement, and there are no problems. Automation Anywhere's support is also available at any moment.

I would rate IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

We mainly use it for invoicing and other similar things. We use it to extract the data in different kinds of forms. 

The flexibility to deploy based on the different types is the most valuable. We can deploy pieces of the program directly over the fields. We can also directly connect with databases. We can modify it and make different connections with the database.

We are also able to programmably modify the fields and change the presentation and values or evaluate a list of values. We can change the values on the fly.

It is very flexible and very easy to use and learn. It is also very simple.

The way this solution creates invoices can be improved. It is slow. Sometimes, it is also very complicated because you need to apply some kind of filters and effects over the images, which makes it a little bit complicated. They can reduce the complexity to manage the fields or incorporate other features. They can provide an easy way for developers to customize and program fields.

The accuracy of the OCR engine can be improved. It would be great if they can also provide an ICR engine and an option to choose between OCR or ICR.

I have been using IQ Bot for a couple of years. 

It has good stability. 

It is very scalable. In terms of scalability, it is very competitive against Datacap, and it is very close to Datacap. These are the leaders in this field.

I didn't get a chance to interact directly with their technical support. I use our internal support. I need to go through our technical team, and they provide level-one support. If they can't resolve our questions, they directly interact with their technical support.

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. Deployment of 25 types of forms with an average of two or three variations probably takes around three weeks.

It has an average cost.

I would recommend this solution. It has been very flexible for us, and it is helping us to reach our goals at the moment. 

I would rate IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

I was using this solution when I was providing a service to a customer. I used the solution for invoice processing.

The solution is able to extract information from invoices which were helpful for my company.

The valuable feature of IQ Bot is the AI functionality.

The solution did not allow the use of other OCR and their own was not accurate and could improve.

I have used IQ Bot within the last 12 months.

The solution is used daily.

I rate the scalability of IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

The support could improve.

I rate the support of IQ Bot a five out of ten.

Neutral

The deployment took three to four months.

I rate the initial setup of IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

There are other solutions on the market that are better.

I advise others to ensure their documents are properly extracted as part of the OCR.

I rate IQ Bot a seven out of ten.

We primarily use our IQ Bot for scanning documents that we get from the vendors. That is number one. We also use it as an HR input tool. When we receive physical documents from an employee wishing to join us, we run them past our IQ Bot solution, updating the master for all employees.

Ours is a retail business, so we use the solution to do continuous management of our recruitment process. From this perspective, maintaining the records of our employees is one of our key challenges. We use the solution primarily for HR data input, although we also employ it for backups.

At times we have to carry the nutrition facts as these relate to our billing cycle in respect of employees and customers.

Should the employee or customer request this, we must scan the nutrition facts of all the treated goods into our system. Previously, this took time, as there were errors such as would be found with the different classes of sodium-potassium or something in a particular product. We do this with an IQ Bot, as well. But, this is at the proof of concept stage. We have not gone with the dark system, the HR system being light.

The extraction feature is the most valuable. Because the post-processing and the pre-processing are very standardized, even from a classification point of view, things are fairly simple, as you still need somebody to feed the data. But, the place where I found the IQ Bots to be a par change in comparison with the other solutions is on the Extraction piece, as it uses good and middle technologies to extract the specific data that we require from the documents.

While there is adaptability in terms of the data series, an issue that should be addressed concerns different sizes sitting on deck, for something that can be done respecting the terms of the sizing of the template that the bot should be. 

Another issue is that the user should be able to update the data libraries. When it comes to small matters, a person should not need to be at the mercy of an implementation partner or Automation Anywhere for the receipt of instructions to reach out to the technical helpers

For other matters, we worked proactively with IQ Bot to address pain areas that we had encountered in our prior experience, such as that of the design evaluation or of the work we had done with our hardware providers in terms of the quality of the scanning and compression technology. This we addressed because of the inordinate burden on hardware capacity when doing high image scans, something which tremendously raises the size boost. So, we have, over time, optimized that along with the Automation Anyway team.

For anything in a standard location, we have fixed the sizes and do examples in the time of the ULT. Our extensive proactive work with IQ Bot reduced our pain areas.

Furthermore, in the past, I had forgone solutions that are in the scanning mode, such as vendor invoice management or OpenText from this or from Kofax. We contemplated the advantages and disadvantages of a scanning solution, a matter we have been instrumental in addressing. We now refrain from trying to do every conceivable task and to scan the entire document.

I have been using IQ Bot within the past 12 months.

We are not using the latest version of the solution. We have employed the more minor of its two upgrades but not the one which matches the latest version.

The solution is reliable. This said, I always explain to people who ask me about any RPA solution that there are two challenges. The first is that a person will have to estimate the running cost of the IQ Bot throughout the life cycle use of a new plan. So, it should not be evaluated as a one-time solution, as there is a maintenance fee required. A license renewal fee of core EMC charges must be paid. All of this should be taken into account. 

Keeping in mind the licensing fees incurred by Automation Anywhere, a deal should be made irrespective of the number of pages.

Otherwise, one may find himself countering good value properties, such as if another license must be purchased after 50,000 or100,000 pages. This would defeat the purpose of the time and investment made in the solution.

As such, one should never view the account being offered as too high to preclude its use. This situation can be encountered faster than one would think. In light of this, it is always better to opt for an unlimited, rather than a limited, license.

It is difficult for me to assess the solution's scalability. We have around 2,000 employees and, assuming that everybody has eight to 10 credentials to be shared, we are attaching only 20,000 or 30,000 copies. So, we haven't, as yet, reached the full potential.

We did not need to make use of the solution's technical support. This is because we made use of our critical six month EMC contract, as part of the standard implementation ring, something we did with Tanium based on our past experience. This allowed us to address, during the six months of post goal life, anything and everything that was not working with the bot.

The initial setup was complex, because if you look at employee certification and data it comes in various forms and formats. It's not like it is with standard A4, A5 or Legal text. Since the shapes vary, we considered the building of a database of the forms and formats to be key, which reduced our pain area.

We are trained to notice when a particular form and factor is not present, something which would stick out to us. This would be, subsequently, fed as a master template into the system, at which point the bot would take over.

This way we reduced the error rate from the bot, updating the master accordingly and its basis for being taken forward.

This allows us to create and feed a format into the system, for recruitment purposes, so that the bot may reference it.

Consequently, our pain areas are dramatically reduced, eliminating much tedium.

The licensing is under usage per page, and I wouldn't recommend it. You should buy it unlimited rather than be restricted in terms of the number of pages.

The pricing has room for improvement. If I had to benchmark all three RPA vendors, I would say that UiPath is cheaper than Automation Anywhere. The second would be Automation Anywhere in terms of flexibility, which beats out UiPath and Blue Prism. This latter is just brewing in India and has yet to grow to the preferred size, as they do not have any customer care based out of the country. It is, instead, based out of the United States, something which does not help me. 

In my present company, I was the one who bought RPA and, as part of that solution, we had also gone ahead and bought IQ Bot.

We have a team of eight people who are using the solution. The bot is structured so that it is used by different people for a variety of activities. One is for master creation, both of an employee and a vendor being involved in the system. Therein we get third party documents, which can be read by the bot.

The second concerns the extensive use of the solution that we employ for the reading of invoice copies.

The third concerns the nutrition elements. So, we have roughly two to three people from each function who use it, meaning fewer than 10 people utilizing it at present. 

While it is a manned bot, everybody has a schedule. Every Monday morning, for two hours, we handle nine or ten with HR. The recruitment is dealt with on the first Monday of the week. That's when natives run by HR the nutrition or other items. We typically run it on Nemesis, because that's when we have twigged our back-end system to get the deliveries on the deal set date, whereby we can use the bot at one signal run.

This is the point at which we have done the scheduling to manage the bot. 

One should not implement this solution until he has the desire to do so. We received it as part of a bundled offer, meaning we had to look for solutions allowing us to make use of it. Only if there is a large amount of scanning, such as a case in which 90 letters produce highly voluminous activity, is an IQ Bot the best solution, absent which a person can manage without the bot. We had already considered HR, but only for the searching of around 20,000 or 30,000 tickets.

If a person has the desired volumes, I would rate IQ Bot as an eight out of ten.

I would say that the best feature is that it has native automation for the US. At the end of the day, you still have to do the same amount of coding to actually pull that data into your code, but with the automation, you are sending it to part of the same kernel, or the same interface, and that makes it much easier. Because I've seen sometimes that they say that even ABI can go with BPA, at least according to the label. But with less than 300 BPA, I see that it's not really possible. Same with the kernel. If there are a lot of tables and frames, it messes it up. But that doesn't happen for IQ Bot.

The first place it could be improved is its price - it is too high. I'm having a lot of difficulties moving it to the customers. If they could fix that it would be awesome. Because the Automation Anywhere is hardware-intensive, it requires other set-ups, a control room, and it's already taking 16 GB of space. Then if I move to IQ Bot, and I have to set up another server for it, it becomes pretty expensive. And that is where the hardware cost comes in. So I think that if they could reduce the cost thing it would be really helpful.

I would say it is the best choice, especially if you're already on Automation Anywhere. They are working at implementing third-party tools. Right now, I am with the company, but before that, I was with another company as well as IQ Bot. A lot of people have purchased a lot of license work but they have not actually put it to good use, or they were unable to. So, it is a question of quality control. But then again, from a CTA perspective, I would say I know it is possible to increase the optical features, as well.

I am not referring to just character recognition, but for example, let's have the scanner import that image properly. Sometimes in a test it happens that the picture is a bit clearer. Or let's say a company logo. If a print is misaligned, it can figure it out. So I am more than happy regarding their automation technology.

I have been using IQ Bot for about four or five years.

The problem is that some of the invoices are very sensitive. If one of these invoices had bad handwriting it just fizzles out, so what has it accomplished? I think it should be able to scan while it is running itself. It should pop up and say, "I am unable to read this can you please help." In that way, we need more traffic to end-users. Then the bot clears one business invoice. But maybe you can have a guy in shipping who just got there while the bot is running, when these jobs start they post those really fast. The reading part might get confusing.

If the bot could just pop up and say, "look at this is the one that I'm confused with, can you please clarify?" If it could do that while the bot is running in IQ Bot, that would be super cool.

I think there are some security issues if you want to scale up. There are two versions - standard and deluxe, standard for basic bot and deluxe for interface with optical printing. So if you scale more than 20 bots, you have to buy more. We work on our commission anyway so you can have a thousand bots running from the same thing for you.

I was in touch with support a couple of times. They are good. There are two parts to the support. One part is in India, where they recently fired a lot of people. The other part is in the US. That team is awesome.

The support guy I got was a champion. He's the one who helped me with IQ Bot to begin with. The point is that it is okay in terms of the system. But let's say there is a call for the controller. With some claims you should not give permission for virtual control because if the agent crashes it also crashes the other systems that are connected to it, which are not visible to them.

I'll tell you the good part and the bad part of Automation Anywhere. Automation Anywhere is amazing for people who have a vision, a plan, and a strategy. People who know what they are doing and are technically sound. Because automation generally comes with a loss of a sense of control. You need to know to whom to give access and for what. Now the problem is that your computer is your own bot. Now what happens with the bot is that they don't necessarily need an architecture to run it. For Automation Anywhere you really need a control room, and a control room costs $7,000 to $10,000. That's what we get for my company. So that becomes a big roadblock.

Because you can just clear the bot, you can get it to stop. You do not necessarily have to connect to the conclusion to run the bot. I can put some code into the batch file and make it run while the bot is running. But you cannot fulfill your function there. So that is a pro and a con.

Specifically for IQ Bot, I would say the setups that I have done took me about seven to 10 days, at the most.

I would say first to do another determination to see if it's worth it. For example, if you are a banking company and you tell me that I'll have a lot of checks that will need to be verified, I would say that's fine, because the format of the checks will be standard. Although you would have to identify the handwriting. But still, at least the amount of coding is easier. However, if you are doing B2B or B2C, and you have multiple invoices coming in to you, I would say don't do it. Because in India, they're very strategic. I can have a person actually putting it into Excel and then I can have a bot taking over. So that's why I already see that it's very important.

The technology should be business-oriented. So unless it is a high-ticket item they won't even talk to me, because business is first. So if you are trying to host a business on your product it is never going to fly. And the problem with automation is that it is close-ended, it is not initial.

They are pointed towards automated scenarios. You can download a version and do things, but they won't listen to the guys who write the code on the ground technical level. They have a different way of operating, because at the end of the day, it is just business. Their mindset is to catch on to the top-level bosses or leaders.

You can do it for a couple of months, or maybe a year or two. They launched version 7.3 two years back, all with multiple backers. In two years you are ensuring that you are out of date. Do you think any product with a life cycle of two years is worth it? I don't. You don't even get value return in two years. Because of the building of the bots, building on a higher component, it takes minimum three years or more to break even. And that is with your bot not completing your applications.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate IQ Bot a 7.

We use IQ Bot to improve the OCR capabilities in our automation.

The most valuable feature is the cognitive ability, as it will learn an interface that it is not familiar with and perform in the way that a human does.

I really like the user interface.

The price of IQ Bot, packaged with Automation Anywhere, is too expensive for some companies and they will not use it. The price should be lowered.

I have been using IQ Bot for about a month, although my experience with Automation Anywhere itself is for more than three and a half years.

IQ Bot is a stable part of the platform.

Management comes into the picture when it comes to scalability. If there are bots available then we are able to scale up and down without affecting our performance.

I have been in contact with technical support and I am satisfied with it.

They have helped us with problems in the past. They respond quickly, and in all of the cases, our problems have been resolved in a maximum of 24 hours.

I have tried other options but there were problems with the OCR that caused me to try IQ Bot. We were having trouble reading invoices from the OCR image data.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. Even deploying all of the bots to the sites, if the person is technical then it is pretty simple and straightforward.

We are using the Community Edition of Automation Anywhere that includes IQ Bot.

The package that includes Automation Anywhere and IQ Bot starts at $10,000 USD.

IQ Bot technology is good and it is a solution that I can recommend for a conventional user. When it comes to people who are from a non-programming background, I think that IQ Bot is fine. There are solutions that require people having programming skills, especially in .NET, which makes developing and managing the bots easy. This is not the case with Automation Anywhere. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use IQ Bot to automate courses.

IQ Bot's best features are its variety of outputs and how it handles structured documents.

IQ Bot doesn't accept or manage unstructured documents properly.

I've been using IQ Bot for a year and a half.

IQ Bot has some problems with stability.

The initial setup was easy.

IQ Bot is good at handling structured documents, but if you have a lot of unstructured or handwritten documents, I recommend using Hyper Center instead. I would rate IQ Bot five out of ten.

We are using IQ Bot for document processing. The use cases are predominantly around NLP and document processing.

It has a lot of great features.

The solution has been quite stable. 

The capabilities meet our needs.

It offers a pretty simple setup process.

So far, the product looks like it can scale.

We've been happy with the product as a whole. There are no missing features.

From what we are operating from now, we don't see any problem areas or anything that needs improvement. 

I would like love to see pre-trained models based on industries. If I'm looking at an insurance domain, if the UiPath, IQ Bot has an algorithm that is pre-trained with the various formats that are available in the market, that would reduce a good amount of development time.

We've used the solution for almost a year or maybe a bit more.

The solution is stable. We have not faced any performance issues as of now. That said, it's still new and we shall see down the line when we cross a critical threshold, how it is behaving.

At this point in time, we are still onboarding use cases. The variety will increase, and the volume as well, likely in the near term. At that time we would come to an understanding about the processing speed and the scalability. Since it is a SaaS product, we have the confidence that it would be available on demand. 

We have been doing everything on our own. We haven't had to reach out to technical support for assistance just yet.

We found the initial setup to be quite simple and quite straightforward. It's a SaaS and therefore not complicated to deploy.

Right now, since it is a fresh and ongoing engagement, the same team builds, deploys, and supports. It's only when you complete the automation development that you would need a team for support. Therefore, at this point in time, there is not much support activity that I foresee. Only time will tell once we enter into everything, what will be the staffing requirement. 

Doing it as a SaaS takes a lot of headaches out. Only the operations would be required to just ensure that the bots have been running. I tend to believe it would not be much of a strain on personnel in terms of maintenance in the future.

Most of the support that we do is predominantly of the infrastructure, maintenance, networking, and all that stuff. On top of that, we will also have the patching, upgrades, and all of that. That is where we see most of the support going. However, for a bot operation, supports are not that high. It is limited. It would be around 12% of the overall team size and it would be in the build state.

We implement the solution for clients. 

I'm not sure of the exact cost related to the solution. I would not have the numbers as this is directly done by the delivery team, which is on the ground. I belong to the overall automation where the costs are billed directly to the project.

Whenever it's UiPath versus Automation Anywhere, and both numbers are looking the same, it's a little higher on the Automation Anywhere compared to UiPath.

In relative terms, Automation Anywhere is a little costlier - maybe 10% more than UiPath. However, UiPath recently increased its license cost. That happened just a few weeks before. 

We are using IQ Bots and they are gaining popularity. We have some solutions around the IQ Bots. In fact, for Automation Anywhere, mostly the clients have IQ Bots as that's around the telecom space and they've gone with the SaaS solution of Automation Anywhere.

With IQ Bot, you need to ensure that you have the right amount of database freedom. If you train with less amount of data, your accuracy goes down, and the confidence score goes down. Then, you come up with the problem of inaccurate executions. When training, it's important, to have the right amount of data and what we are extracting. I'd also advise adopting a co-bot approach for the initial attempts until you believe that it is well trained enough to make it automatic.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.