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

Appian vs Make comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 11, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Appian
Ranking in Process Automation
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (9th), Rapid Application Development Software (11th), Low-Code Development Platforms (5th), Process Mining (6th), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (12th)
Make
Ranking in Process Automation
26th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
AI Software Development (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Appian is 4.5%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Make is 1.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Appian4.5%
Make1.2%
Other94.3%
Process Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Shad Bhowmik - PeerSpot reviewer
Finance Specialist at a government with 5,001-10,000 employees
Automated remittance workflows have boosted speed and accuracy but still need geo-tagging improvements
Remittance is a crucial part of my integral operation, so any disruption would majorly impact our clients. After switching to Appian, we never faced any disruption as it is reliable and we can generate data at any point in time, quite faster than other tools in my personal opinion. Regulators can ask for data from us at any time, and with Appian, we download data from our Appian tools to share it with them whenever they ask. I would share a real-life example: a customer's transaction processed more than a year ago. Suddenly the customer came back asking for all the details. In our previous tool, it was quite difficult to generate transaction details from over a year ago; however, while using Appian, we can pull up data using different key search fields, such as a customer's cell phone number, remittance tracking number, or MT103 reference number. We shared it with the customer instantly, and the customer was surprised we could provide all the details in such a short time. It added reputational value for our organization, thanks to Appian.You have pointed out two major things: time-saving and reduction of error, which are key points while processing remittance. Previously, while using another tool, it was quite time-consuming to process remittance, but after switching to Appian, it can extract data from MT103, eliminating the need for manual data entry. The process has become fully automated. Previously we could process only five to ten transactions within an hour, but now, after switching to Appian, we can process about 100 transactions in an hour, making it 10 times faster. In terms of error detection, since Appian extracts data from MT103, the extraction rate is quite good, and the error rate is negligible, lower than 0.001%. We can share accurate, error-free data with the regulator, which is essential for us. Appian benefits us significantly. After receiving an MT103, we check what the remitter is, the amount, if it is under threshold for processing, and if it is from a high-priority remitter or client. Since Appian extracts data from MT103 messages and identifies top-level clients from the database, it can notify us to process their transactions with priority. Due to automated data extraction, there are fewer instances of error. In our previous tool, we reported regulatory data to the central bank manually and often received complaints about invalid purpose codes due to manual data entry. Appian handles this automatically, and after switching, our error rate has dropped significantly, resulting in positive feedback from the Central Bank of Bangladesh regarding our reduced error rates. This has greatly enhanced our organization's reputation. Appian is fully on-premises, and we have our own system.
FA
Chief Executive Officer at Ashtex Solutions
Flexibility and efficiency accelerate business processes
Make needs to put some focus on or clarify the security aspect in its documentation or website. When creating automation through these modules between two different applications, there should be clarity about whether the data is secure while passing through these automations or integrations created within Make. The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved. The operation consumption is too high and sometimes becomes a burden on the client. Make needs to review its pricing strategy since they have tough competition from n8n. Make sometimes has issues with user logins and data saving when simultaneously working on two different PCs or when two developers are working on something or some blueprint. It can lose saved data from one interface to the other, and when logging on with the same user on another workstation, it occasionally misbehaves. We were unaware that Make had its own local implementation module. They need to advertise this feature more effectively as we are developing many projects in Make and working with various clients.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"The Application Designer is very user friendly. There are also lot of plug-ins that you can use and, for the most part, they are free."
"The valuable features include process automation, Appian Portal, and Appian RPA."
"We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features."
"In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"Appian is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."
"The most valuable features of Make are the additional options when compared to other similar solutions. For example, with Google my business, you can only do certain things with Zapier, whereas with Make, you can do a little bit more."
"Make has a very good return on investment because although we pay that amount, we secure clients and the client life cycle is kept intact."
"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."
 

Cons

"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"Lacks business rules management as part of the solution."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once."
"We would like to have more granular control for interface styling."
"Form creation and SAIL proprietary language still basically require programming. The claim a BA type can do everything is hogwash."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."
"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."
"Make could improve the ease of use, it can be more complicated than other solutions. There are a lot of elements that are more technical than in other solutions."
"One thing is that the platform is really slow when loading. It takes about three minutes to get to the page of an automation and start changing things."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"More flexibility in the licensing model is still needed because initially there were customers who are looking at only one or two use cases of business areas, but now the business areas are changing and there is a larger scope. One license model may not fit everyone. They need to be a little more flexible on the licensing model."
"If you're doing an enterprise-wide digital transformation, Appian is worthwhile, but not for just one or two use cases because the license costs are higher."
"It's good value for the price."
"The price of this solution is a little high here in Mongolia."
"The licensing will be on a monthly basis. We are estimating that cost to be around $2000 to maybe $3,000 per month. We don't foresee any costs above that."
"It's an enterprise tool and can be used by enterprise only. So it's a very expensive tool."
"Product pricing compared to some of the earlier vendors, like IBM, CA, and Oracle, is quite well-priced. Although, we do feel that as we increase the number of users and the workload increases, we will have to spend more."
"The pricing can be a little confusing to customers."
"The price of Make is approximately $20 per month for the platform."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise44
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which do you prefer - Appian or Camunda Platform?
Appian is fast when building simple to medium solutions. This solution offers simple drag-and-drop functionality with easy plug-and-play options. The initial setup was seamless and very easy to imp...
Is Appian a suitable solution for beginners who have no additional preparation?
Appian is actually pretty big on educating its users, including with courses that reward you with certifications. There is a whole section on their company’s website where you can check out the edu...
Is it easy to set up Appian or did you have to resort to professional help?
We had some issues when we were setting up Appian. It was quite surprising, since this is a low-code tool which, in its essence, means it is meant for business users and inexperienced beginners. So...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Make?
I find the pricing, setup costs, and licensing costs of Make to be reasonable.
What needs improvement with Make?
One thing is that the platform is really slow when loading. It takes about three minutes to get to the page of an automation and start changing things. That is really slow and frustrating. Another ...
What is your primary use case for Make?
In our current company, we have a funnel workflow for the people who sign up. We do certain things such as creating database entries, creating our CRM entries, and then updating the information. If...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Appian BPM, Appian AnyWhere, Appian Enterprise BPMS
Integromat
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hansard Global plc, Punch Taverns, Pirelli, Crawford & Company, EDP Renewables, Queensland Government Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (, Bank of Tennessee
Buan Consulting, Armadia
Find out what your peers are saying about Appian vs. Make and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.