No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Camunda vs No Magic MagicDraw comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Camunda
Ranking in Business Process Design
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (1st), Process Automation (1st), AI Orchestration Frameworks (3rd), Agentic Automation (9th), AI Agent Builders (10th), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (7th)
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of Camunda is 7.1%, down from 11.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.4%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Camunda7.1%
No Magic MagicDraw2.4%
Other90.5%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

CristianoGomes - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Supports long-running asynchronous processes effectively but has not evolved much in recent years
I think Camunda is focusing too much on the SaaS offering right now and not much on improving and developing the product itself. I did not see any innovations on that aspect, especially for the open-source version. I was making some tests recently and the tool seemed pretty much the same as it was three or four years ago. Since they made the move to cloud deployment in a more SaaS-oriented way, they do not invest too much in the community version. To be honest, it did not change much from the Activiti initial version. Activiti was pretty much what Camunda is today. They invested a lot on Zeebe and made it the engine for their SaaS cloud version. Camunda itself, the embedded engine, did not evolve too much. They could invest more on that.
reviewer2080611 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Ease of use and real-time collaboration empower effective teamwork and streamlined development
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works only with its IBM counterparts. SPARX Enterprise Architecture is very easy to use, but it's limited. It gives you an idea of how your model is developing, so this feature helps maintain integrity or correctness of system models. It's really a good feature to have. You've got to have the simulation toolkit installed to be able to do that, and that works really well. The MagicDraw or CAMEO system is good on its own, but it should be integrated and should come out of the box with the simulation toolkit because there are some things you can't do without it, making it very difficult to have to look for another license to be able to do that. I would prefer that it come with the simulation toolkit.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ease with which I can define workflows is most valuable. The latest updates and flexibility that it provides around a task activity are interesting for me."
"Camunda's process diagram creation and deployment is very easy."
"Having knowledge of the BPM and monitoring process has proven to be very beneficial, as I am currently engaged in documenting processes for Clientele."
"For an internal project, this is a solution that you can install and have up and running quite quickly."
"We were able to build our rules-based API engine, and it does exactly what we wanted it to."
"The flexibility is great."
"We have a lot of users, almost 1,800, and we needed something affordable, stable, and something that could be used by a large financial company, and this solution truly fit the bill."
"Camunda is the best among similar solutions like JBPM and Activiti."
"It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile."
"My advice to anybody who is designing complex projects, like defense projects or space projects, is that they have to use this program or one like it."
"The technical support is very good."
"We use it to build the physical and logical domains to hold requirements, specifications, use cases, and all the way down to class definitions."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"No Magic has the tools and capabilities to model a complete enterprise and all product lines."
"I alone can maintain all architecture documentation for a larger project as well as for one or two selected systems."
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
 

Cons

"Documentation can be improved. Right now, the documentation isn't properly organized."
"The user interface needs some polishing because it is too technical for end-users to use it."
"It's costly and not accessible for small enterprises or startups. It would be great if Camunda offered a tier plan for smaller companies."
"I would like to have a feature for audit logging, audit logs and audit log management. And some history of use for the audit logs."
"The GUI needs to be improved, with more configuration options."
"We have to wait to see if Bonita provided us with some features that Camunda does not or if we experience any stability issues."
"The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself."
"If there were some industry templates it would have helped significantly, because it is similar to a process map for a domain. That is what we are currently creating, a domain-relevant process map."
"The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"However, there are some technical features that you have to study and do research on to be able to understand."
"Larger models slow you down; committing, updating, merging of branches and comparing of models (diff) do not scale yet; issues will hopefully be solved with upcoming V19."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy live business process models and capture real-time data (without the need for another product tool) so you don't have to be dependent on other products for this functionality."
"There's lots of documentation. They process multiples of guides. They've got all kinds of guides and documentation out there, but it's kind of hard to find. There are a lot of videos. You can go to YouTube and find videos on how it's been used in different ways, but it just kind of scratches the surface."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the free version."
"While the license isn't budget-friendly, careful consideration and calculated planning for a significant number of licenses can make it more cost-effective."
"There is a bit of scope for improvement in how the licensing and pricing are done. They are based on the number of processing instances you execute on the cluster... but on the self-hosted mode, the pricing model should be customized."
"We're using the free version. We used the Enterprise version for some time. If I compare free versus what we paid at that time, the Enterprise version costs a lot. For the additional functionality that we got with the Enterprise version, it was too costly."
"I tried to get some information about buying the license for the solution, but I found it kind of hard to understand the business model."
"There were some features that were only available in the paid version."
"We are using the open-source version of this solution."
"Cheaper licensing and resources than competitors"
"I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise33
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

How does Bonita compare with Camunda Platform?
One of the things we like best about Bonita is that you can create without coding - it is a low-code platform. With Bonita, you can build the entire mechanism using the GUI, it’s that simple. You c...
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...
Which would you choose - Camunda Platform or Apache Airflow?
Camunda Platform allows for visual demonstration and presentation of business process flows. The flexible Java-based option was a big win for us and allows for the integration of microservices very...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for No Magic MagicDraw?
Maybe the price is a little bit high for a small company to acquire this tool. However, they offer trial versions and trial licenses for members of INCOSE.
What needs improvement with No Magic MagicDraw?
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works...
What is your primary use case for No Magic MagicDraw?
I deal with DOD lifecycle acquisition sorts of things as some of the main use cases currently, and I expect to continue using it for more than 25 years.
 

Also Known As

Camunda BPM
MagicDraw
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

24 Hour Fitness, AT&T Inc., Atlassian, Autodesk, Barclays, BNP Paribas, CapitalOne, Commerzbank AG, Deutsche Telekom, Fujitsu, Gainsight, Generali, Goldman Sachs, Provinzial, NatWest Group, Panasonic, R-Kom, Swisscom AG, VHV Group, Warner Music, WellPoint, Zalando
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda vs. No Magic MagicDraw and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.