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

Top 10 Appian Alternatives

Vendor: Appian
4.2 out of 5
Badge Leader
Leave a review

Top Appian Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Appian based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include ServiceNow, Camunda, and GitLab. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

Appian surpasses its competitors by offering a low-code platform that enhances business agility, accelerates process automation, and integrates seamlessly with various systems, delivering superior customer outcomes through intuitive interface and robust security features.

Appian Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Appian, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Appian Logo
ServiceNow
4.2 out of 5
Appian Logo
ServiceNow
4.2 out of 5
ServiceNow offers flexibility and in-depth workflows, appealing to large enterprises needing complex customizations. In comparison, Appian's low-code platform enables rapid app development, attracting organizations seeking swift deployment. ServiceNow's higher cost reflects its comprehensive features, while Appian appeals with competitive pricing for faster deployment needs.
Download Appian vs. ServiceNow Report
ServiceNow offers a straightforward setup cost structure, while Appian provides options that appear more flexible; differences in pricing may influence user preference depending on specific needs.
View comparison
Pricing
ServiceNow offers a straightforward setup cost structure, while Appian provides options that appear more flexible; differences in pricing may influence user preference depending on specific needs.
Appian Logo
Camunda
4.1 out of 5
Appian Logo
Camunda
4.1 out of 5
Appian provides ease of use in low-code development, making it ideal for various project complexities. In comparison, Camunda focuses on process modeling and integration, excelling in customization for complex workflows. Appian appeals to those needing rapid deployment; Camunda suits budget-conscious, integration-focused applications.
Download Appian vs. Camunda Report
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to Camunda, which offers a more cost-effective initial implementation.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to Camunda, which offers a more cost-effective initial implementation.
Appian Logo
GitLab
4.2 out of 5
Appian Logo
GitLab
4.2 out of 5
Appian excels in rapid development with low-code features ideal for automation, making it suitable for real-time applications. In comparison, GitLab focuses on DevOps with strong CI/CD and code repository support, making it appealing for managing complex workflows.
Download Appian vs. GitLab Report
Appian typically requires a significant initial setup cost, while GitLab offers a more flexible cost structure, highlighting a key financial discrepancy in deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian typically requires a significant initial setup cost, while GitLab offers a more flexible cost structure, highlighting a key financial discrepancy in deployment.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC)
4.0 out of 5
Informatica IDMC excels in data management with strong governance and data integration features. In comparison, Appian focuses on process automation and offers rapid deployment and flexible workflow management, making each ideal for different organizational needs.
Download Appian vs. Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) Report
Informatica IDMC offers a cost-effective setup with flexible deployment options, while Appian has a higher upfront setup cost, reflecting its extensive customization capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
Informatica IDMC offers a cost-effective setup with flexible deployment options, while Appian has a higher upfront setup cost, reflecting its extensive customization capabilities.
Appian Logo
Control-M
4.3 out of 5
Appian Logo
Control-M
4.3 out of 5
Appian offers rapid development and low-code app deployment, focusing on ease of use and quick app creation. In comparison, Control-M provides detailed workflow monitoring and extensive scheduling support for large enterprises. Appian excels in support, while Control-M meets complex scheduling needs.
Download Appian vs. Control-M Report
Appian entails a higher setup cost while Control-M offers a more budget-friendly initial setup expense. This pricing distinction underscores the more substantial initial investment required for Appian compared to the more economical setup option provided by Control-M.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Appian entails a higher setup cost while Control-M offers a more budget-friendly initial setup expense. This pricing distinction underscores the more substantial initial investment required for Appian compared to the more economical setup option provided by Control-M.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Microsoft Power Automate
3.9 out of 5
Appian emphasizes process modeling and rapid development, ideal for organizations seeking comprehensive low-code solutions. In comparison, Microsoft Power Automate offers cost-effective automation with tight integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, making it appealing for those prioritizing seamless compatibility with Office 365 and simple automation tasks.
Download Appian vs. Microsoft Power Automate Report
Appian typically involves higher initial setup costs compared to Microsoft Power Automate, which offers a more budget-friendly entry point.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian typically involves higher initial setup costs compared to Microsoft Power Automate, which offers a more budget-friendly entry point.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Microsoft Power Apps
3.9 out of 5
Appian promotes agile workflow creation and swift deployment, suitable for enterprises needing rapid development. In comparison, Microsoft Power Apps excels in data integration, ideal for those seeking seamless connectivity with Microsoft services. Tech buyers may choose Appian for customization, while Power Apps is favored for scalability.
Download Appian vs. Microsoft Power Apps Report
Appian's setup cost is competitive and straightforward, whereas Microsoft Power Apps often requires additional investment upfront.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is competitive and straightforward, whereas Microsoft Power Apps often requires additional investment upfront.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
SAP Signavio Process Manager
4.1 out of 5
Appian offers rapid low-code development and robust integration, making it ideal for quick market deployment. In comparison, SAP Signavio excels in process modeling and collaboration, providing a user-friendly platform for businesses to optimize and visualize processes efficiently.
Download Appian vs. SAP Signavio Process Manager Report
Appian's setup cost is typically lower, making it a more budget-friendly option, while SAP Signavio Process Manager tends to have higher initial expenses associated with its implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is typically lower, making it a more budget-friendly option, while SAP Signavio Process Manager tends to have higher initial expenses associated with its implementation.
Appian Logo
Pega Platform
4.1 out of 5
Appian Logo
Pega Platform
4.1 out of 5
Pega Platform excels in enterprise solutions with strong case management and low-code development, appealing to businesses requiring extensive configurations. In comparison, Appian offers flexible, user-centric design with quick prototyping, emphasizing AI and process automation for faster deployment and time-to-value.
Download Appian vs. Pega Platform Report
Pega Platform's setup cost is noted for being expensive, whereas Appian offers a more affordable initial cost, highlighting distinct pricing strategies between the two platforms.
View comparison
Pricing
Pega Platform's setup cost is noted for being expensive, whereas Appian offers a more affordable initial cost, highlighting distinct pricing strategies between the two platforms.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Automation Anywhere
4.2 out of 5
Appian excels in low-code development for rapid deployment and easy integration, appealing to businesses seeking quick ROI. In comparison, Automation Anywhere focuses on RPA with advanced automation tools, ideal for enterprises requiring robust automation suites with higher technical expertise.
Download Appian vs. Automation Anywhere Report
Appian has a higher initial setup cost, while Automation Anywhere offers a more affordable entry-level option with its setup fees.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a higher initial setup cost, while Automation Anywhere offers a more affordable entry-level option with its setup fees.
Appian Logo
Mendix
4.2 out of 5
Appian Logo
Mendix
4.2 out of 5
Appian excels in rapid low-code development for enterprise integration, favored for its process modeling. In comparison, Mendix focuses on quick application prototyping with model-driven development, ideal for businesses needing flexible UI customization and integration with external systems like Java.
Download Appian vs. Mendix Report
Appian has a lower upfront setup cost compared to Mendix, which requires more initial investment. Mendix users often mention the additional setup expenses as a consideration.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a lower upfront setup cost compared to Mendix, which requires more initial investment. Mendix users often mention the additional setup expenses as a consideration.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Oracle Application Express (APEX)
4.1 out of 5
Appian excels with its low-code features and rapid multi-platform deployment, appealing to those prioritizing quick time-to-market. In comparison, APEX offers seamless database integration, ideal for cost-conscious developers seeking robust Oracle-driven solutions without extensive coding.
Download Appian vs. Oracle Application Express (APEX) Report
Appian offers a higher setup cost compared to Oracle APEX, which provides a more budget-friendly initial investment. Users seeking a lower startup expense might consider Oracle APEX over Appian.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian offers a higher setup cost compared to Oracle APEX, which provides a more budget-friendly initial investment. Users seeking a lower startup expense might consider Oracle APEX over Appian.
Appian Logo
Bizagi
4.2 out of 5
Appian Logo
Bizagi
4.2 out of 5
Appian accelerates development through low-code tools and integrates seamlessly, making it ideal for complex projects. In comparison, Bizagi offers simplicity with an intuitive interface and affordable options, appealing to those seeking efficient process automation and ease of setup.
Download Appian vs. Bizagi Report
Appian's setup cost is higher, emphasizing its robust features, while Bizagi offers a more affordable setup, appealing to budget-conscious users seeking essential functionalities.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is higher, emphasizing its robust features, while Bizagi offers a more affordable setup, appealing to budget-conscious users seeking essential functionalities.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Salesforce Platform
4.1 out of 5
Appian excels in rapid development with low-code functionality supporting agile needs. In comparison, Salesforce provides extensive CRM tools with robust customization. While Appian offers competitive pricing and quick ROI, Salesforce's comprehensive integration justifies its higher cost for larger organizations.
Download Appian vs. Salesforce Platform Report
Appian's setup cost is typically lower, offering a cost-effective solution for businesses, whereas Salesforce Platform may involve higher initial expenses due to its extensive features and integrations.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is typically lower, offering a cost-effective solution for businesses, whereas Salesforce Platform may involve higher initial expenses due to its extensive features and integrations.
Appian Logo
OutSystems
4.2 out of 5
Appian Logo
OutSystems
4.2 out of 5
Appian appeals with its user-friendly setup and rapid deployment, making it ideal for businesses seeking fast implementation and strong process management. In comparison, OutSystems offers superior integration and flexibility, appealing to organizations needing versatile, cross-platform solutions with a drag-and-drop interface.
Download Appian vs. OutSystems Report
Appian setup costs are higher due to customization flexibility, while OutSystems offers a more budget-friendly setup with efficient implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian setup costs are higher due to customization flexibility, while OutSystems offers a more budget-friendly setup with efficient implementation.
Appian Logo
IBM BPM
3.9 out of 5
Appian Logo
IBM BPM
3.9 out of 5
Appian offers rapid low-code development, appealing to businesses seeking quick ROI. In comparison, IBM BPM targets larger enterprises with complex needs due to its integration capabilities. Appian's pricing is attractive for mid-sized enterprises, while IBM BPM justifies higher costs with extensive functionality.
Download Appian vs. IBM BPM Report
Appian's setup cost is lower, providing an economical entry, while IBM BPM involves a higher initial investment, suggesting a comprehensive solution.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is lower, providing an economical entry, while IBM BPM involves a higher initial investment, suggesting a comprehensive solution.
Appian Logo
ARIS BPA
4.1 out of 5
Appian Logo
ARIS BPA
4.1 out of 5
Appian's low-code platform simplifies development with process modeling and case management. In comparison, ARIS BPA excels in enterprise-level process modeling, supporting complex organizational landscapes. Appian enhances agility, while ARIS BPA provides detailed integration with business strategies and comprehensive documentation.
Download ARIS BPA vs. Appian Report
Appian's setup cost is typically higher, reflecting its comprehensive features, while ARIS BPA offers a more budget-friendly initial implementation. Users may find the upfront investment or the initial savings as significant decision factors.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is typically higher, reflecting its comprehensive features, while ARIS BPA offers a more budget-friendly initial implementation. Users may find the upfront investment or the initial savings as significant decision factors.
Appian Logo
Celonis
4.2 out of 5
Appian Logo
Celonis
4.2 out of 5
Appian offers rapid development with its low-code platform and strong case management, while Celonis excels in data mining and process optimization. In comparison, Celonis demands more expertise but provides value with advanced analytics. Both support various deployments and have distinct pricing strategies.
Download Appian vs. Celonis Report
Appian typically requires an upfront investment for setup costs, whereas Celonis offers a more flexible cost structure.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian typically requires an upfront investment for setup costs, whereas Celonis offers a more flexible cost structure.
Appian Logo
Apache Airflow
4.0 out of 5
Appian Logo
Apache Airflow
4.0 out of 5
Appian excels in low-code BPM solutions with rapid deployment and user-friendly design. In comparison, Apache Airflow appeals for data orchestration with its open-source flexibility and Python integration, despite limitations in UI and deployment, offering affordability through community support.
Download Apache Airflow vs. Appian Report
Appian's setup costs are substantial, often requiring a larger investment upfront, whereas Apache Airflow offers a more budget-friendly setup, catering to companies with tighter financial constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup costs are substantial, often requiring a larger investment upfront, whereas Apache Airflow offers a more budget-friendly setup, catering to companies with tighter financial constraints.
Appian Logo
GitHub CoPilot
4.1 out of 5
Appian Logo
GitHub CoPilot
4.1 out of 5
Appian's low-code development appeals to non-technical users seeking rapid app creation with vast integration options, reducing development time. In comparison, GitHub CoPilot targets experienced developers, providing AI-driven code suggestions to enhance productivity within existing development environments for efficient coding.
Download Appian vs. GitHub CoPilot Report
Appian requires a higher setup cost compared to GitHub CoPilot, which offers a more affordable initiation pricing.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian requires a higher setup cost compared to GitHub CoPilot, which offers a more affordable initiation pricing.
Appian Logo
SnapLogic
3.9 out of 5
Appian Logo
SnapLogic
3.9 out of 5
Appian excels with its low-code platform for rapid deployment and process management. In comparison, SnapLogic offers strong integration capabilities with its ETL feature for complex system connections, making it suitable for high-volume data transfers and intricate integrations.
Download Appian vs. SnapLogic Report
Appian has a higher setup cost, while SnapLogic offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a higher setup cost, while SnapLogic offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
Appian Logo
Hyland OnBase
3.9 out of 5
Appian Logo
Hyland OnBase
3.9 out of 5
Appian offers agility with low-code development, excelling in Agile workflows and integrated business applications. In comparison, Hyland OnBase provides secure document management with robust audit trails. Appian appeals for rapid implementation, while OnBase’s strength lies in its configuration-based ECM standards.
Download Appian vs. Hyland OnBase Report
Appian's setup cost is reportedly higher, reflecting its advanced features and flexibility, while Hyland OnBase offers a more budget-friendly setup, appealing to organizations with tighter financial constraints and a focus on document-driven processes.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is reportedly higher, reflecting its advanced features and flexibility, while Hyland OnBase offers a more budget-friendly setup, appealing to organizations with tighter financial constraints and a focus on document-driven processes.
Appian Logo
Bonita
4.1 out of 5
Appian Logo
Bonita
4.1 out of 5
Appian offers rapid deployment and strong integration, ideal for enterprises needing complex process modeling. In comparison, Bonita provides user-friendly modeling with strong form-building, suitable for businesses seeking flexible integration. Appian's higher cost reflects its extensive features, while Bonita is more affordable.
Download Appian vs. Bonita Report
Appian involves a higher setup cost compared to Bonita, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment. This cost difference highlights a key decision factor between the two platforms.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian involves a higher setup cost compared to Bonita, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment. This cost difference highlights a key decision factor between the two platforms.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Microsoft Azure App Service
4.2 out of 5
Appian offers a low-code environment, beneficial for rapid app deployment and integration. In comparison, Microsoft Azure App Service excels with scalable PaaS solutions and deep Azure integration for enterprise applications. Azure suits those in the Microsoft ecosystem, while Appian aids fast development.
Download Appian vs. Microsoft Azure App Service Report
Appian's setup cost is higher and involves complex initial deployment compared to the more straightforward and affordable setup of Microsoft Azure App Service.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is higher and involves complex initial deployment compared to the more straightforward and affordable setup of Microsoft Azure App Service.
Appian Logo
AWS Step Functions
4.2 out of 5
Appian Logo
AWS Step Functions
4.2 out of 5
Appian offers robust low-code development with rapid app deployment and cohesive architecture. In comparison, AWS Step Functions excels in workflow orchestration for AWS environments with advanced workflow capabilities. Appian supports flexible deployment options while AWS Step Functions leverages usage-based pricing.
Download AWS Step Functions vs. Appian Report
Appian often has higher setup costs, reflecting its comprehensive solutions, whereas AWS Step Functions typically offer lower initial expenses, highlighting its focus on scalability and flexibility.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian often has higher setup costs, reflecting its comprehensive solutions, whereas AWS Step Functions typically offer lower initial expenses, highlighting its focus on scalability and flexibility.
Appian Logo
ADONIS
3.9 out of 5
Appian Logo
ADONIS
3.9 out of 5
Appian excels in low-code application development, offering rapid deployment and diverse business solutions with strong automation capabilities. In comparison, ADONIS focuses on process documentation and compliance, appealing to users needing detailed documentation, with a more budget-friendly pricing structure for educational markets.
Download ADONIS vs. Appian Report
Appian requires a higher upfront investment compared to ADONIS, making budget allocation a key differentiator. ADONIS offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to those seeking affordability with initial deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian requires a higher upfront investment compared to ADONIS, making budget allocation a key differentiator. ADONIS offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to those seeking affordability with initial deployment.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Nintex Process Platform
3.9 out of 5
Appian excels in rapid low-code development and robust integration capabilities. In comparison, Nintex Process Platform focuses on workflow creation within the Microsoft ecosystem. Appian suits complex BPM needs, whereas Nintex offers straightforward workflow management, flexibility, and cost-effective solutions but can be resource-intensive.
Download Appian vs. Nintex Process Platform Report
Appian has higher setup costs compared to Nintex Process Platform, which presents a more budget-friendly option. However, this may reflect Appian's comprehensive features, where the initial investment could appeal to enterprises seeking extensive capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has higher setup costs compared to Nintex Process Platform, which presents a more budget-friendly option. However, this may reflect Appian's comprehensive features, where the initial investment could appeal to enterprises seeking extensive capabilities.
Appian Logo
Temporal
4.3 out of 5
Appian Logo
Temporal
4.3 out of 5
Appian excels with rapid development in a low-code environment, offering robust process design for agile business solutions. In comparison, Temporal's developer-centric approach simplifies long-running workflows and ensures fault tolerance, making it ideal for handling distributed transactions in complex environments.
Download Appian vs. Temporal Report
Appian's setup cost is higher, reflecting its advanced features, while Temporal offers a more budget-friendly setup, appealing to cost-conscious users.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is higher, reflecting its advanced features, while Temporal offers a more budget-friendly setup, appealing to cost-conscious users.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
ServiceNow Now Platform
4.1 out of 5
Appian provides a robust low-code platform with rapid deployment and minimal coding. In comparison, ServiceNow offers extensive IT service management valued for large enterprises. Appian is praised for cost-effectiveness, while ServiceNow provides comprehensive features but may challenge smaller companies with higher costs.
Download Appian vs. ServiceNow Now Platform Report
Appian has a lower setup cost, making it budget-friendly, while ServiceNow offers an extensive feature set with a higher setup cost.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a lower setup cost, making it budget-friendly, while ServiceNow offers an extensive feature set with a higher setup cost.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
IBM Business Automation Workflow
3.9 out of 5
Appian excels in rapid low-code development, facilitating quick ROI with agile deployment, while IBM Business Automation Workflow offers comprehensive integration across its suite with advanced process automation. In comparison, IBM BAW provides robust workflow management, centralizing processes and enabling deep integration with robotic processes.
Download Appian vs. IBM Business Automation Workflow Report
Appian's setup cost is generally lower, offering a more cost-effective solution for quick deployment, while IBM Business Automation Workflow may involve higher initial expenditures, reflecting its comprehensive capabilities and customization options.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is generally lower, offering a more cost-effective solution for quick deployment, while IBM Business Automation Workflow may involve higher initial expenditures, reflecting its comprehensive capabilities and customization options.
Appian Logo
QuickBase
4.5 out of 5
Appian Logo
QuickBase
4.5 out of 5
Appian excels in rapid development capabilities with quick deployment and comprehensive business process management, appealing to enterprises with complex needs. In comparison, QuickBase offers flexibility and intuitive report generation, ideal for organizations seeking customizable solutions without requiring extensive technical knowledge.
Download Appian vs. QuickBase Report
Appian's setup cost is typically higher, reflecting its enterprise focus, while QuickBase offers a lower setup cost, appealing to smaller businesses. The differences highlight Appian's robust capabilities and QuickBase's accessibility.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is typically higher, reflecting its enterprise focus, while QuickBase offers a lower setup cost, appealing to smaller businesses. The differences highlight Appian's robust capabilities and QuickBase's accessibility.
Appian Logo
ARIS Cloud
4.0 out of 5
Appian Logo
ARIS Cloud
4.0 out of 5
Appian excels in rapid low-code development and agile workflows for businesses needing flexible integration. In comparison, ARIS Cloud is ideal for enterprises requiring robust collaboration and process modeling, ensuring diverse OS compatibility and effective large-scale process documentation.
Download ARIS Cloud vs. Appian Report
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to ARIS Cloud, highlighting a significant price difference.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to ARIS Cloud, highlighting a significant price difference.
Appian Logo
Unqork
4.0 out of 5
Appian Logo
Unqork
4.0 out of 5
Appian attracts buyers seeking rapid deployment with low-code capabilities and flexible cloud solutions. In comparison, Unqork appeals to those valuing rich enterprise integrations and dynamic UI options. Appian's scalability contrasts Unqork's performance in handling complex tasks. Pricing reflects their targeted features and business needs.
Download Appian vs. Unqork Report
Appian entails moderate setup costs, while Unqork offers competitive pricing with lower initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian entails moderate setup costs, while Unqork offers competitive pricing with lower initial expenses.
Appian Logo
Oracle BPM
3.7 out of 5
Appian Logo
Oracle BPM
3.7 out of 5
Appian's low-code platform allows rapid app deployment, appealing to those needing swift development. In comparison, Oracle BPM excels in integration with extensive system connectivity, making it suitable for enterprises seeking robust process modeling and comprehensive integration tools for complex environments.
Download Appian vs. Oracle BPM Report
Appian's setup cost is considered more affordable, while Oracle BPM tends to have a higher setup expenditure, emphasizing a notable cost difference between the two platforms.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is considered more affordable, while Oracle BPM tends to have a higher setup expenditure, emphasizing a notable cost difference between the two platforms.
Appian Logo
BIC Platform
4.1 out of 5
Appian Logo
BIC Platform
4.1 out of 5
Appian offers robust process automation and seamless integration, making it ideal for enterprises prioritizing efficiency and mobile capabilities. In comparison, BIC Platform provides superior customization and compliance management, appealing to businesses seeking tailored solutions. Both cater to different priorities in the business process management space.
Download Appian vs. BIC Platform Report
Appian offers a higher setup cost with a focus on complex enterprise needs, while BIC Platform provides a more budget-friendly setup ideal for smaller companies seeking straightforward deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian offers a higher setup cost with a focus on complex enterprise needs, while BIC Platform provides a more budget-friendly setup ideal for smaller companies seeking straightforward deployment.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service
4.0 out of 5
Appian provides comprehensive process automation tools with competitive pricing and strong support. In comparison, Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service offers a flexible app creation environment integrated with Oracle services. Appian's simplicity appeals to limited IT resources, while Oracle suits those in the Oracle ecosystem.
Download Appian vs. Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service Report
Appian's setup cost is often higher, reflecting its extensive features, while Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service tends to have a more accessible initial price, appealing to those seeking budget-friendly options with essential functionalities.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is often higher, reflecting its extensive features, while Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service tends to have a more accessible initial price, appealing to those seeking budget-friendly options with essential functionalities.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
iGrafx Process360 Live Platform
4.2 out of 5
Appian offers strong low-code development and faster ROI. In comparison, iGrafx Process360 Live Platform provides comprehensive features such as advanced compliance management. Appian supports easier deployment, while iGrafx offers strategic consultation and various deployment options, appealing to diverse client needs.
Download Appian vs. iGrafx Process360 Live Platform Report
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to iGrafx Process360 Live Platform, which offers a more cost-effective setup experience.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to iGrafx Process360 Live Platform, which offers a more cost-effective setup experience.
Appian Logo
Studio Creatio
4.3 out of 5
Appian Logo
Studio Creatio
4.3 out of 5
Appian offers rapid low-code development and comprehensive integration capabilities, ideal for diverse business needs. In comparison, Studio Creatio provides simplicity and effective CRM functionality, appealing to those prioritizing ease of use and process automation.
Download Appian vs. Studio Creatio Report
Appian offers competitive setup costs, focusing on initial investment, while Studio Creatio provides flexible setup options, offering greater scalability. Pricing differences highlight Appian's commitment to upfront affordability versus Studio Creatio's investment in long-term value.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian offers competitive setup costs, focusing on initial investment, while Studio Creatio provides flexible setup options, offering greater scalability. Pricing differences highlight Appian's commitment to upfront affordability versus Studio Creatio's investment in long-term value.
Appian Logo
KiSSFLOW
4.3 out of 5
Appian Logo
KiSSFLOW
4.3 out of 5
Appian offers robust scalability and comprehensive features appealing to enterprises needing advanced process management. In comparison, KiSSFLOW's user-friendly no-code design suits non-IT users seeking simplicity and ease of use, making it attractive to smaller businesses prioritizing accessibility over extensive functionality.
Download Appian vs. KiSSFLOW Report
Appian involves a high setup cost, while KiSSFLOW offers a more affordable initial setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian involves a high setup cost, while KiSSFLOW offers a more affordable initial setup.
Appian Logo
BizTalk Server
3.7 out of 5
Appian Logo
BizTalk Server
3.7 out of 5
Appian provides rapid development and seamless application deployment, with a strong low-code platform and architecture. In comparison, BizTalk Server excels in integration, offering robust transaction management and orchestration. Appian accommodates flexible cloud environments, while BizTalk is largely on-premises, impacting scalability and flexibility.
Download Appian vs. BizTalk Server Report
Appian's setup cost is typically lower, providing a more cost-effective option compared to BizTalk Server, which often involves higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is typically lower, providing a more cost-effective option compared to BizTalk Server, which often involves higher initial investment.
Appian Logo
Zoho Creator
4.3 out of 5
Appian Logo
Zoho Creator
4.3 out of 5
Appian's emphasis on rapid application development and agile workflows makes it ideal for extensive process automation projects. In comparison, Zoho Creator's flexibility in building data-centric apps without extensive coding caters to smaller-scale projects, focusing on CRM integration and ease of transition from prototypes to live applications.
Download Appian vs. Zoho Creator Report
Appian has a higher initial setup cost, while Zoho Creator offers a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a higher initial setup cost, while Zoho Creator offers a more budget-friendly option.
Appian Logo
SS&C Blue Prism
3.8 out of 5
Appian Logo
SS&C Blue Prism
3.8 out of 5

Appian offers competitive pricing and simplified deployment, appealing to those seeking cost-effective automation. In comparison, SS&C Blue Prism attracts buyers with advanced features and scalability, ideal for organizations prioritizing comprehensive robotic process automation despite higher initial investment and complex setup.

Download Appian vs. SS&C Blue Prism Report
Appian has a straightforward setup cost, while SS&C Blue Prism involves a more complex initial configuration. Appian provides a simple entry into the platform compared to the detailed installation process of SS&C Blue Prism.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a straightforward setup cost, while SS&C Blue Prism involves a more complex initial configuration. Appian provides a simple entry into the platform compared to the detailed installation process of SS&C Blue Prism.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
OpenText Operations Orchestration
3.9 out of 5
Appian offers user-friendly application development and seamless integration, ideal for rapid deployment. In comparison, OpenText Operations Orchestration excels in advanced IT process automation and extensive orchestration, catering to complex environments for experienced users seeking comprehensive workflow management and efficiency.
Download Appian vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration Report
Appian's setup cost is significantly lower than OpenText Operations Orchestration, allowing users to implement it with greater ease and speed, while OpenText Operations Orchestration's higher setup costs may imply a more complex implementation process.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is significantly lower than OpenText Operations Orchestration, allowing users to implement it with greater ease and speed, while OpenText Operations Orchestration's higher setup costs may imply a more complex implementation process.
Appian Logo
AgilePoint
4.1 out of 5
Appian Logo
AgilePoint
4.1 out of 5
Appian excels in flexibility and security, appealing to businesses valuing these aspects. In comparison, AgilePoint attracts tech buyers with its superior customization and integration capabilities. Appian benefits from easier deployment, while AgilePoint's complex setup can maximize ROI through tailored solutions.
Download AgilePoint vs. Appian Report
Appian incurs higher initial setup costs compared to AgilePoint, which offers a more budget-friendly setup fee. This price distinction highlights Appian's higher entry expense versus AgilePoint's economical approach.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian incurs higher initial setup costs compared to AgilePoint, which offers a more budget-friendly setup fee. This price distinction highlights Appian's higher entry expense versus AgilePoint's economical approach.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
Boomi AtomSphere Flow
3.9 out of 5
Appian excels in low-code development, offering quick deployment and strong process automation. In comparison, Boomi AtomSphere Flow is praised for cost savings and scalability. Appian's high pricing reflects its flexible capabilities, while Boomi offers affordability for smaller businesses with promising ROI.
Download Appian vs. Boomi AtomSphere Flow Report
Appian offers a low initial setup cost, while Boomi AtomSphere Flow involves a higher setup investment, highlighting a significant pricing difference between the two platforms.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian offers a low initial setup cost, while Boomi AtomSphere Flow involves a higher setup investment, highlighting a significant pricing difference between the two platforms.
Appian Logo
Appian Logo
OpenText Process Automation
3.9 out of 5
Appian offers a strong low-code platform with rapid deployment and flexible mobile support. In comparison, OpenText Process Automation excels in dynamic case management and scalable workflows. Appian's flexible licensing aids cost-effectiveness, while OpenText focuses on tailored licensing for clients, emphasizing archival functions.
Download Appian vs. OpenText Process Automation Report
Appian incurs higher setup costs compared to OpenText Process Automation, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian incurs higher setup costs compared to OpenText Process Automation, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
Appian Logo
Newgen OmniFlow
3.9 out of 5
Appian Logo
Newgen OmniFlow
3.9 out of 5
Appian is favored for its low-code development and rapid cloud deployment. In comparison, Newgen OmniFlow excels in feature depth and cost-effectiveness, offering robust document management and strong customer service, making it ideal for complex environments and businesses seeking budget-friendly solutions.
Download Appian vs. Newgen OmniFlow Report
Appian requires a higher initial setup cost, while Newgen OmniFlow offers a more economical setup. This cost difference plays a significant role in budget considerations when choosing between these two solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian requires a higher initial setup cost, while Newgen OmniFlow offers a more economical setup. This cost difference plays a significant role in budget considerations when choosing between these two solutions.
Appian Logo
Jitterbit Vinyl
4.4 out of 5
Appian Logo
Jitterbit Vinyl
4.4 out of 5
Appian enables rapid low-code development with seamless integration, ideal for complex enterprise environments. In comparison, Jitterbit Vinyl excels in no-code app creation and customizable user interfaces, suitable for businesses prioritizing easy integration and quick deployment cycles.
Download Appian vs. Jitterbit Vinyl Report
Appian typically has lower setup costs compared to Jitterbit Vinyl, which may appeal to businesses seeking budget-friendly solutions. However, Jitterbit Vinyl's pricing reflects its advanced capabilities and broader feature set.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian typically has lower setup costs compared to Jitterbit Vinyl, which may appeal to businesses seeking budget-friendly solutions. However, Jitterbit Vinyl's pricing reflects its advanced capabilities and broader feature set.
Appian Logo
AuraQuantic
4.4 out of 5
Appian Logo
AuraQuantic
4.4 out of 5
Appian excels in ease of use and customer support, ideal for rapid app development. In comparison, AuraQuantic's adaptability and extensive features attract those needing comprehensive customization, despite a steeper learning curve and higher cost, offering significant ROI for complex business needs.
Download Appian vs. AuraQuantic Report
Appian's setup cost is higher compared to AuraQuantic, which offers more cost-effective initial pricing. AuraQuantic's lower setup expenses appeal to businesses seeking budget-friendly solutions, while Appian's setup investment indicates a focus on premium service levels.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian's setup cost is higher compared to AuraQuantic, which offers more cost-effective initial pricing. AuraQuantic's lower setup expenses appeal to businesses seeking budget-friendly solutions, while Appian's setup investment indicates a focus on premium service levels.
Appian Logo
Adobe ColdFusion
4.3 out of 5
Appian Logo
Adobe ColdFusion
4.3 out of 5
Appian excels in customer support and cost-effective automation, enhancing ROI through streamlined processes. In comparison, Adobe ColdFusion offers superior web development features and performance, making higher costs worthwhile for businesses needing advanced scripting and versatile deployment options.
Download Adobe ColdFusion vs. Appian Report
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to Adobe ColdFusion, which offers a more budget-friendly initial expense. The pricing difference highlights the contrasting positioning of both solutions in terms of affordability and initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Appian has a higher setup cost compared to Adobe ColdFusion, which offers a more budget-friendly initial expense. The pricing difference highlights the contrasting positioning of both solutions in terms of affordability and initial investment.

Related categories

Business Process Management (BPM)
Process Automation
Rapid Application Development Software