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

Appian vs SS&C Blue Prism comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 20, 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 Business Process Management (BPM)
11th
Ranking in Process Automation
8th
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (9th), Process Mining (7th)
SS&C Blue Prism
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
33rd
Ranking in Process Automation
27th
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
25th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (21st), Medical Insurance Claims Software (3rd), Insurance Claims Processing (5th), Document Management Software (15th), Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (16th), Loan Management Software (2nd), Document Automation Software (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Appian is 6.0%, down from 6.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SS&C Blue Prism is 0.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

RAVIRANJAN - PeerSpot reviewer
Low-code with good reliability and good workflows
We have a partnership with Appian. We have worked with Appian to deal with issues. They have already incorporated many things into their platform. One of the things we have discussed, which I can highlight, is related to Excel manipulations. They have incorporated their Excel manipulations so it's far better than the earlier version. Earlier, we had to go with a plugin for even a simple Excel or spreadsheet calculation. Now, they have included all those things in their own out-of-the-box functionality. It's definitely a tool and does not require high code language. There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases. One thing, for example, is Excel manipulation, which they now provide in their out of box functionality, however, that can still be improved.
Gavin Beckett - PeerSpot reviewer
Design studio enables effective automation while licensing needs improvement
I noticed that it lacks the ability to automatically record the process steps like some of its competitors. Having this capability could accelerate the process. The delivery methodology felt somewhat waterfall in style and not sufficiently agile. Additionally, the licensing model was somewhat prohibitive. It was not developed in a consumption-based manner, however, rather in a fixed-price licensing model that did not account for volumes.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support has been amazing overall."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"The initial setup is easy."
"This is the most complete solution of its kind."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"The tool is very flexible."
"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"I find the design studio, where I can build the automation, and the control room feature, which allows me to run and monitor the automation, to be the most useful."
"Some important features include the language capabilities, which are crucial since RPA has to read the documents provided by the customer."
"The key feature of SS&C that I find valuable is the general workflow visibility."
 

Cons

"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"Appian has a few areas for improvement, which my organization raised with the Appian team. One is the Excel output which is limited to fifty columns when it should be up to two hundred or three hundred columns."
"The reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards."
"While Appian is generally flexible, it's rigid in some ways. It takes longer to do something that isn't available out of the box."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"There is no UI customization possible."
"I noticed that it lacks the ability to automatically record the process steps like some of its competitors."
"There is a need for improved integration with external systems in SS&C."
"Blue Prism is more costly than UiPath in terms of robotic licenses and orchestrators."
 

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."
"The cost is calculated on a per-user basis. It might be expensive for small and mid-sized enterprises."
"The cost is a bit higher than other low-code competitors, OutSystems and Mendix. The price needs to be more competitive."
"The solution offers a monthly subscription model. That's what we use. I recall it being about $90 a month. They do have different tiers."
"Appian is very flexible in their pricing. In general, Appian's pricing is much, much lower when compared to competition like Pega or other products. Appian also has a flexible licensing model across geographies. Pega usually goes with a single licensing cost—which is a US-based cost—for all global customers, and it's costly. Whereas Appian has a different regional licensing cost model and it can be cheaper, depending on geography. So Appian's licensing is very flexible, and cheaper when compared to other competition."
"The pricing can be a little confusing to customers."
"I think that if somebody is really serious at looking at business value, then by all means, the product is well worth the value. You get representative business value for the price that you pay for the product, and for the implementation of the product."
"BPM done right is a huge value proposition for almost any company, and with Appian's low code rapid development model, the ROI can be huge, while the break-even point should be accelerated tremendously."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
27%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
17%
Insurance Company
11%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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 SS&C Blue Prism?
The pricing was not particularly competitive. It wasn't flexible for different geographies. For instance, in Africa, they didn't have a different pricing model to account for affordability. The pri...
What needs improvement with SS&C Blue Prism?
There is a need for improved integration with external systems in SS&C. Currently, integration is limited to web services and K scripts for connecting to third-party systems, which I believe ca...
What is your primary use case for SS&C Blue Prism?
My primary use case for SS&C is managing migration projects. We are currently working on migrating from ViewStation's 3.5 version using K scripts to the new version in SS&C and rebuilding t...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Appian BPM, Appian AnyWhere, Appian Enterprise BPMS
SS&C AWD
 

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
AWS, EY, Deloitte, ABBYY, Microsoft, GLYNT.AI, Pfizer, Invesco, Western Union
Find out what your peers are saying about Appian vs. SS&C Blue Prism and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.