Camunda Reviews

Our use case for Camunda is primarily workflow automation and rule management, utilizing both DMN cases.

In my opinion, the best features of Camunda include the data scientist side where we have Optimize that can help us analyze the processes and see where the heat map is, which is useful in everyday business to know regarding the volumes and workflows that are taking more time than expected.

The overall solution with Camunda is very convenient regarding the connectors with Salesforce, Workday, and other tools, which helps expedite projects and achieve good returns on investment, meaning that under six or nine months, you can implement a project. For example, we started a project in January and delivered it in May, something traditional development cannot provide.

I see improvements with Camunda mainly in quality and service. I feel the best return on investment is less work for internal teams and enhanced value for end customers, allowing less experienced personnel to effectively work with Camunda and understand their responsibilities, alleviating dependence on specific knowledgeable employees.

In Camunda, I believe the process mining side has room for improvement. Before modeling or implementing a new process, understanding existing workflows in the company is vital, suggesting that process mining would be beneficial starting from a previous step.

In addition to process mining, there are technical demands from internal teams wanting to execute queries on SGBD or within our elastic database in Camunda. Although I feel a database demand may not be as relevant since a performant tool relies on having a modern database, improvements on the .NET field are desired, as existing connectors are supported by editors while others come from the community. It would be helpful to have supported .NET connectors by the editor.

My experience with Camunda spans three or four years.

For stability, I would rate it a nine, noting that while several releases occur every six months, which can be difficult for some customers, it remains very stable. Frequent updates necessitate staying up to date.

From one to ten, I would rate the technical support for Camunda a nine. The support is excellent, but communication barriers may arise for French customers due to the need for English during technical issues.

As a partner, we implement Camunda for customers and gather feedback on their satisfaction and project outcomes.

In our organization, we have about 30 specialists working with Camunda, mainly focusing on ETI companies, typically below 5,000 employees, but we also handle projects with CAC 40 companies and public firms on the stock market.

Regarding pricing for Camunda, I believe it is cheap when considering the cost of the volumes, but planning constraints are crucial. Regulatory changes or implementation needs should not take years to resolve, as the value is not just the license cost per number of cases run in the workflow, but how you achieve service enhancement for your company.

Comparing Camunda to vendors such as Pega or Bizagi is challenging. I find Camunda to be particularly trendy, with many coming projects and a strong sales team, positioning it to boom in 2025 and 2026. Other tools do not share the same dynamic, which is why I consider Camunda agile.

We do not use AI agents broadly, but when implementing them, they help us analyze cases and understand customer intent through some first-step analysis, with the last decision remaining human. Engaging users remains difficult, since a workflow tool is already a revolution and AI adds complexity in understanding its decision-making process.

With Camunda, it is very easy to observe and control processes during runtime. Implementing transversal processes requires company-level engagement, but once established, transformation becomes straightforward. The challenge lies in human engagement and internal communication to convey forthcoming changes. However, Camunda offers smooth and visually appealing tools that are comprehensible and well-presented compared to other solutions.

I would recommend implementing Camunda, advising to work with a partner, as it fosters an easier acceptance of change among internal teams when an external company navigates the transition. Regarding communication, having a contractor to lead the changes simplifies the process. I give this review a rating of 10.

Camunda is used for domain-specific business processes. For example, Camunda is used for a process to schedule technicians, send them to the customer, and then receive and process their feedback.

The development and improvement of new and existing processes has improved significantly. It is much easier, even for non-developers, to understand processes and identify errors or weaknesses in a process.

Direct metrics are not available, but communication between departments has definitely improved as a result.

BPMN as a processing language and modeling language is very practical both to work with and develop processes, as well as to understand processes.

A very practical feature of Camunda is the connectors, which basically extend BPMN and allow for developing better tools to create processes even more easily and understandably.

I consider the governance and security capabilities regarding AI to be very high. Camunda is used with an AI process, and it is not possible for the AI to do something it should not do.

Camunda Modeler is often used, for example to ask questions about certain modeling techniques or more specific functions within a process, and the accuracy and answers provided are very accurate and reliable.

I am not aware of any better provider for orchestration of complex business processes.

Process speed is extremely important. The goal is to provide customers with the fastest possible process for their orders. In the delivery of a product, many business-related and technical processes are directly involved. It is important that this single process runs through completely and is understandable and extendable for a wide variety of business units.

This already works relatively well. An AI agent first tries to handle its tasks on its own, and as soon as it reaches a point where it cannot move forward or where certain critical tasks need to be completed, an employee is involved via a user task.

Quality is extremely important, and automated and manual decisions should be combined in a meaningful way to avoid errors and respond flexibly to customer requirements.

Currently, there are no areas for improvement that come to mind.

Camunda has been used for approximately five to six years.

Camunda is extremely stable.

Scalability is very good. Starting with just one or very few processes, Camunda has enabled development to scale to create more and more processes faster and faster.

Customer support is very good. As soon as there are problems or inquiries, an answer or appropriate help is provided within a short time.

A self-implemented workflow engine was used and is still in place, which had already automated many business processes. Due to new requirements, it reached its limits, and there were also certain technical reasons why a replacement was or is necessary in the near future.

Precise figures on ROI are not available, partly because metrics were not in place beforehand.

Much cannot be said about setup cost as that was not my area. However, colleagues have indicated that there has always been a good contact person in this regard.

Previous experience with BPMN meant that Camunda was the only solution really considered. After trying Camunda, it was determined that it was the right choice.

The combination of being able to program oneself and go as deep as possible, while also being able to use existing options and functions from Camunda, is valuable.

Camunda is used as a direct customer relationship.

For the introduction of Camunda, I would recommend choosing the most manageable use case possible as a kind of prototype product or project. I would also recommend involving Camunda support as much as possible to accompany a project at the beginning. This way, valuable hints and support are obtained that would otherwise require significant effort to discover.

Camunda has been given a rating of 10 out of 10.

Our primary use of ECS is to host all our services in the cloud. We work in the legal sector, and our workloads are often deployed on Fargate containers or Azure containers to abstract the hardware.

EC2 makes scaling horizontally incredibly easy, especially when working under the ECS service. Nowadays, I almost never need to create instances of virtual machines because most workloads can be deployed on Fargate containers. This abstraction of hardware reduces the need to think about it. 

My costs are reduced. Working with ECS and Fargate doesn't require saving processing units for idle services. Previously, using EC2 required keeping entire virtual machines running, however, Fargate eliminates this cost. ECS also allows for horizontal scalability with thresholds that can be configured for CPU or memory.

There is an issue where, in some situations, I need to scale up by observing both CPU and memory usage of containers, yet under the current options available at Amazon, this is not possible. I have to choose between monitoring CPU or memory to scale my solution. Not every software is built for deployment as a container service, although the current architecture trend is changing this.

I host everything in the cloud, and I have over ten years of experience. I use EC2 as a hosting technology and have been using it for a long time.

My services running on ECS are also on Azure Container Service. I have never experienced any flicker or downtime. These are highly available services. It's very stable.

ECS and Fargate make horizontal scalability very easy. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It allows for easy scaling, especially with ECS service configurations.

The AWS Support is incredible. They always invite us for meetings to showcase new solutions. I have a very good relationship with AWS, Microsoft, and GCP for support. AWS provides the best support, followed by Microsoft, and then Google.

Positive

Setting up ECS is simple, although there are some tricks involved. I usually have to define private and public networks and bind all related services. It's easy but not super straightforward. I had to repeat the process two or three times before I could teach others how to configure it.

Hosting services on Fargate reduces our processing costs since we don't need to keep virtual machines running for workloads anymore. This results in cost reductions.

AWS pricing is very competitive compared to Azure and cheap compared to Google. For some services, such as hosting databases, Google is really expensive.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate ECS a ten out of ten. It's an incredible service, and I prefer it over Kubernetes. I suggest checking the integration of software for deployment in a serverless environment. Some software can be challenging to deliver this way.

My main use case for Camunda is intelligent document processing. I use Camunda for intelligent document processing in the banking business process around all kinds of documents, and it is used to orchestrate classification, extraction, and business decisions.

My impressions of Camunda for orchestrating complex end-to-end business processes are that it is a very good tool to handle the complexity of business cases.

The best features Camunda offers include high performance and excellent modeling capabilities.

The modeling experience stands out for me due to the interface, the respect for industry standards, and also the integration capabilities with templates of services named connectors.

Camunda has positively impacted my organization by simplifying business process management and improving time to market. We have reduced the code by 50% and improved time to market.

Camunda can be improved with current features and development that are interesting, such as process design using generative AI or agentic orchestration.

I have been using Camunda for four years.

Regarding Camunda's AI capabilities, I consider its accuracy and reliability of output to be very reliable. It is a high-performance orchestration engine, and we have had very few production incidents over the span of a few years.

Camunda is deployed in my organization as a private cloud. I use Red Hat OpenShift as the cloud provider for the private cloud deployment. My overall rating for Camunda is 10 based on the overall quality, performance, and vision.

Camunda can be used in various workflow scenarios, such as policy administration systems, onboarding, account management in telecom, insurance products, policy issuance, claims management, and loan management. 

It is also suitable for customer service center activities where customers' accounts are created. Camunda can manage any workflow that requires customer interaction with the system. It is a competitor to other BPM solutions like Pega.

The architectural part of Camunda for workflow design is highly valuable, especially the Camunda Modeler, which allows quick process design and implementation. Camunda's DML is a competitor to the implementation of business rules. 

It integrates well with Java, making it suitable for various technology stacks. Camunda facilitates microservices integration. Its SaaS model provides scalability, automatically managing and scaling implementations.

The deployment model could be improved for easier implementation. More open documentation would be beneficial to understand the deployment process better and facilitate easier setup.

I began working with Camunda in 2013.

Camunda is quite stable, and I would rate its stability around eight to nine out of ten. There haven't been any significant outages in my experience with Camunda.

Camunda offers a high level of scalability, especially when using its SaaS model, which manages and scales implementations automatically. I would rate its scalability a ten out of ten.

Camunda's community is medium-sized, offering reasonable support. However, they provide better support for the enterprise edition. There was not a large community in the early years.

Positive

Other competing solutions include JBPM, Activiti, and Pegasystems.

The initial setup can be difficult, with a rating of seven on a scale from one to ten. While not very hard, some features present challenges.

For earlier versions, implementation involved bundling applications as WAR or EAR files using Maven, and deploying them on JBoss Server. I have yet to explore Camunda 8's implementation process.

There is a licensing cost for using the SaaS model and Enterprise edition of Camunda, although I am not aware of the specific pricing.

Other solutions evaluated include JBPM and Activiti.

For anyone considering using Camunda, it is essential to understand your workflow clearly. Camunda is the best among similar solutions like JBPM and Activiti. I love working with Camunda.

Our common use case for Camunda is working on seeing how we can replace Bonita with it for some projects.

We are trying to replace Bonita, especially because the reporting in Camunda seems to be more developed than Bonita's tools.

The biggest difference between Camunda and Bonita might be that Camunda is simpler and more flexible for setting, though we are at the beginning and need to experiment.

I have to experiment with the performance of Camunda, but not yet in production. I haven't put any solutions in production yet, so perhaps performance is better as we see in documentation.

I have been working with Camunda for six months.

We have to wait to see if Bonita provided us with some features that Camunda does not or if we experience any stability issues.

I have not yet had any downtime that required raising tickets or any integration issues because Camunda does not support some of my tools or data.

I have not contacted the Camunda Technical Support team at any point, though perhaps members of my team have.

For the initial setup, the whole process takes about one day perhaps, two days, as the process is simple and we don't have any difficulties.

We are using the open-source community version, but I don't have an idea about the cost of enterprise edition to make a comparison.

Regarding pricing, we are right now working with the open-source Community version, but I don't have yet an idea about the cost of the enterprise edition.

I can talk about our experience with Camunda. For the moment, we are not using any sort of AI with Camunda at all, but for other technology, we use AI.

I am a co-founder of that enterprise.

I rate Camunda an eight out of ten for the moment because I don't really understand the exact parameters of the scale. It is still in proof of concept, and when it goes into production, I will have more ideas on how it should be done.

We use it in telecom service management to automate and orchestrate our service order flows.

There is DMN (Decision Model and Notation) on the flows, but it depends on how the user interprets the question. If it's purely decision-making, then not really. It's a feature of the platform we use but not the main one. 

The main feature is the BPMN orchestration workflow engine.

We had to look for a replacement because our old tool didn't evolve anymore. Camunda is a further evolution or branch of activity. There are certain branches of workflow engine tools, and Camunda seems to have a lot of traction, maturity, and stability. It also matches the need for agile development. 

In terms of efficiency and execution, we're satisfied. In terms of design, you still need to create the design and give it to someone else, but the graphical user interface is fine.

The fact that it's open source is interesting. My colleagues like the support, even the free or basic support. We now have enterprise support, but they were quite satisfied with the basic one. 

The main feature is BPMN, in its totality. You have the design, editor, monitoring, execution, scaling, and deployment. So, it's the total package that they're quite happy with.

Probably one area I look forward to has to do with AI and how Camunda sees the AI angle on workflow. I know they're working on that or at least communicating about it. They already have versions to run on the cloud, so they've tackled that. We're looking at what they will come up with otherwise. 

As long as the product gets enough traction and evolves, we're happy. With open source, you can monitor what's happening. If the product is being left by many customers, that's a sign. We're also users of Camunda, and you can watch one of our guides' presentations in the States about one of our implementations.

Our focus now is on developing service management and DMN APIs for the platform. AI is something we take into consideration, but we'll see what additional benefits it could bring and how to interconnect it with our data or AI engineering.

I have been using it for three years. I use the latest version. 

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. No major things to worry about.

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten, and it could be improved. I am not 100% sure of its scalability capabilities. We haven't done enough volumes on it. 

The system is primarily for automated flows. Maybe there are 20 or 25 people who use the production version as a user. It's not really a system with a lot of manual stuff. For us, I would assume the usage is rather limited at this stage.

It is used in production every day. We plan to increase the use of Camunda in the future. 

We now have an enterprise contract because of the increasing volume in production. We want to ensure we have good enough SLAs, so we probably bought the enterprise support. 

Positive

We had plenty of workflow engines in that domain. The company used Oracle BPEL, a workflow product that was originally open source but was bought by Oracle a long time ago and then became a paid license product.

Other products in different domains: 

We've got SAP HR modules and logistics modules, and we've migrated a few to SAP HANA, but I'm not the best reference for that domain. 

In our multiple domains, we have a mix of commercial and technical platforms. We use Camunda for custom development, and ClickSoftware for field work management, which we're migrating to IFS.

For the setup, I'd probably rate it a nine out of ten. I'm not personally involved, but it's quite easy.

• Deployment resources: It's probably only one or two people who were busy installing the product. I don't think it's a huge problem or challenge.

• Integration aspect: There was a bit of a challenge, but it was resolved by redesigning an activity in the process flow. It wasn't a huge problem, but the people had to figure out how to use existing mechanisms to solve it.
• We can resolve the challenges that might arise in Camunda using the features on the platform. It might not be immediately out of the box, but we can find a setup or pattern that brings us the solution. We can extend the framework. I haven't really seen blocking factors at this stage, and I know of other companies that use it, so it looks alright.

• For the maintenance part, I assume it's quite a small team. 

It's a license for support. So, it's not too expensive, in my opinion.

Development teams use open source components, do a small check on different tools, and then go for one. I don't think there was a specific RFP (request for proposal) process involved, but I'm pretty sure they looked at the market. They looked at other workflow engines like Activity in previous projects.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

My advice:

New buyers should definitely look at this option. It's a good option as the product is technically sound. There are quite a few customers running on the platform and good reference customers. There is a community forum, and the documentation is readily available. So, if you are investigating options, it should definitely be on your list, if not at the number one spot.

Recent trends around workflow automation:

We see a lot of cloud SaaS solutions coming up with their own workflow platforms. For example, SAP or Salesforce also come with workflow systems. You need to consider that these platforms have embedded options where you have no choice but to use them. But if you have spots where you do your own development or there is a package that uses Camunda, the interesting part will be what steps they provide to work with the data and AI to make the solution even more attractive.

The solution is used in my company, where we deal with insurance.

In our company, we use Camunda to automate our process to reduce the need for human tasks. In short, my company uses the product to reduce the need for manual work. The tool can help automate processes like insurance claims, onboarding, and other areas that are managed manually. Various processes in our company can be converted to automated ones with the help of Camunda.

The best feature related to the product is that it offers users a zero-code or no-code platform, so people can use the product without being developers or knowing Java or other microservices.

The support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.

Though Camunda offers one of the best support services in the market, I know that Camunda Platform 8.0 is still in the development phase. The tool can have more guidelines and best practices that can be made available over the internet to help people who are researching the solution as it is a new product in the market.

I have been using Camunda for a year. My company currently uses Camunda Platform 8.0. I am just a user of the product.

It is an absolutely stable solution.

It is a scalable solution.

Camunda is a new product in our company, but once we show the abilities of the tool and showcase it by going live with the solution, our company's entire client base will open up.

There are no admins required to take care of Camunda.

My company plans to use more of the product in the future.

Camunda is the first tool that we have used in our company. I believe that Infosys was using IBM, but they also moved to Camunda recently.

The product's initial setup phase was neither an easy nor a difficult process, though my company did receive support from Camunda, considering that I work in a big company with firewall products in place. There were some hurdles during the setup phase, making it a not-so-smooth process, but my company was able to deploy the product successfully in the environment.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises and on the cloud model.

Compared to some of the major players in the market, like IBM, Camunda is a cheaply priced product, making it one of its major USPs.

My company chose Camunda since it has two parts, one of which is Camunda Rule Engine, while the other one is Camunda BPMN. When it comes to Camunda Rule Engine, Camunda passes a set of rules through the tool itself, a process that doesn't happen in the system but happens externally through validation checks called the Camunda DMN Decision Engine. After a certain period, my company realized that Camunda's main feature lies in what Camunda BPMN provides to its users. After getting a demo of Camunda, my company was impressed with the solution, and we decided to try it.

Camunda's website is filled with a lot of knowledgeable stuff, so it is important to get in touch with a person from Camunda. By just going through the website Camunda, it is possible to strengthen your understanding of the fundamentals of the product. Camunda also provides free courses to those who want to learn more about the product.

I rate the overall tool a seven and a half out of ten.

Since I completed the courses at my workplace, I have only used Camunda for testing and practice. We had assignments to create a flow for pizza delivery and another one for an electronic shop. This practice was verified by our professor.

We have one process that was migrated from our RPA department. It used a series of UI elements for client cases, but now it is streamlined using API calls in the background. The process is more stable and efficient because it processes cases faster without being affected by UI changes like new buttons or pop-ups.

The use of Java is a big plus for our intern developers, and Camunda scales well, as many of our departments are already using it in production with dedicated teams.

The setup process is a drawback as it has many dependencies, which affects our ability to migrate to Windows eleven due to security concerns. I would like to see better integration with the Microsoft suite and more language options, especially for our internal applications.

I've been using Camunda for a few months. 

I have not experienced any performance or stability issues. It runs smoothly.

Camunda is more scalable than Blue Prism. It supports entire process automation, including manual tasks, not just robotic processes.

There was no need to escalate any questions to Camunda's tech support. However, I have escalated issues for UiPath and Blueprints.

Positive

Our department used Blueprints since 2020. The transition to Camunda is challenging since people are familiar with the previous tool.

The initial setup was guided by the professor's guidelines and involved installing several programs and agreeing on a Java version. After setup approval and training, we encountered some issues that were addressed with help from the professor.

The transcript does not contain specific information about ROI.

I don't know the exact numbers behind cost-effectiveness. I know licenses for the other tools, like UiPath and Blueprints, become more costly over time since they require annual renewal.

I also have experience with other process automation solutions like Blue Prism, UiPath, Power Automate, and Blueprint.

I would recommend Camunda because Java is well-received and encourages clean code standards. The tool's visual appeal makes it accessible to both developers and business analysts. BPMN notation familiarity is a plus.

I'd rate the solution nine out fo ten.

I worked on a project in Pakistan. For this project, I replicated processes on Camunda, including BPDs (Business Process Diagrams) and activities. Currently, I am working on the forms aspect of the implementation.

I appreciate Camunda's strong SLA agreement, my current bank client required customized forms. Camunda forms are built on Angular, and I'm currently involved in a headless reporting project with Camunda.

Camunda's front end is built in Angular, while I'm integrating the Java backend services. I'll consume the Java services and handle integration with Angular on the front end.

When deploying Camunda, I prefer a headless approach. This means Camunda acts as middleware while the front end is built using a different technology. And back end will be from the different technology. 

 I've integrated a database with Camunda's process engine. This allows me to generate emails and update the database as needed.

It is very user-friendly compared to IBM BPM. It's much simpler because it doesn't have the process admin and process inspector roles and separate pages – it's more streamlined. That means even non-technical departments can use it. 

If we don't need complex, high-level workflows but just a small form-based process, Camunda can be used by any type of client – technical or non-technical.

I don't see a lot that needs improvement in the core functionality. With the on-premises version, the task list has issues, and user creation is not as straightforward as in IBM BPM with its Process Admin role. 

Camunda also lacks some of the initial documentation that helps with onboarding. I often rely on Udemy courses for help.

So, basically, on-premises user management needs improvement.

I'd recommend a feature like the Process Inspector that IBM BPM offers. This is where you can troubleshoot and manage running processes. It would be very helpful for non-technical users, as sometimes they need insight into where a process is stuck. 

Camunda Cockpit has similar functionality, but it's a bit more complex. I'm a technical person, so I understand it, but our clients are often from non-technical backgrounds. My clients are mostly common users from commerce backgrounds. 

So it would be better for Camunda to be able to easily view their processes and troubleshoot process instances.

The Process Portal in IBM BPM is basically a dashboard view. If Camunda could offer a similar dashboard for users, it would be a big benefit for their organizations.

I have been using it for six months. I use version eight. 

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a five out of ten. Scalability would be improved with better documentation and resources. IBM BPM, for instance, offers extensive documentation and support teams for various issues. Camunda's documentation feels less comprehensive in comparison.

Additionally, it would be helpful to have more readily available use cases on the internet. This is important for doing POCs [Proofs of Concept] and showcasing how Camunda can be used. IBM BPM has many example use cases for systems like currency exchange or HR management. 

Camunda lacks this, often showing only very small processes that can be difficult for clients to envision within their own needs.

So, the lack of readily available use cases affects the ability of Camunda to adapt to your customer's needs.

I have experience with both IBM developer tools and Camunda. 

Due to cost considerations, we often recommend Camunda to smaller clients where IBM solutions might be too expensive in Pakistan, especially for small companies. 

I also do POCs [Proofs of Concept]. The demands I receive from customers are varied, but they want to move forward with the technology. If Camunda fulfills their requirements, they will definitely adopt it. Before Camunda, I also worked on Appian, but it wasn't as exciting as Camunda.

I'm doing a Master's in Data Science, so I know how crucial decision-making is for customers. Once my first POC is done, I'll definitely explore decision modeling. Camunda is still in its early stages in Pakistan.

There aren't as many resources in Pakistan as there should be.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, with ten being easy. Installing Camunda on your machine is incredibly easy. It's even easier than installing MS Office. I also installed IBM BPM on a virtual machine, and that took me one or two weeks to configure fully. Camunda is much simpler in comparison – the process is similar to installing MS Office.

Most customers I have are in the banking sector, so they prefer on-premises deployment. 

It takes around three days to deploy the solution because it includes things like permissions etc. Camunda is significantly quicker to deploy in comparison to IBM BPM, which takes around ten days. 

I'm a developer, not an administrator. So, I usually work with the administration team for the actual deployment. Typically, we need a few key files: one for the setup and one for the Camunda server itself. I'm familiar with the server file since I have Camunda installed for development on my own computer.

Compared to IBM BPM or Appian, Camunda's pricing is good.

Camunda is significantly cheaper than IBM BPM, especially considering the SLA agreement. Of the three products, it offers the best price-to-value ratio.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I'd recommend it if you're currently paying a high annual fee for a solution like IBM BPM. Camunda is much more affordable while still offering a strong SLA agreement and security. 

It's worth trying – perhaps initially with a smaller process in your organization. You could even test it on a UAT environment before going live. I often recommend this approach to clients, as it's a good solution for many use cases.