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

Celonis vs QPR ProcessAnalyzer comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 2024

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

Celonis
Ranking in Process Mining
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
AI Data Analysis (6th)
QPR ProcessAnalyzer
Ranking in Process Mining
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Process Mining category, the mindshare of Celonis is 16.9%, down from 18.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QPR ProcessAnalyzer is 2.3%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Mining Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Celonis16.9%
QPR ProcessAnalyzer2.3%
Other80.8%
Process Mining
 

Featured Reviews

EA
Data Engineer at Baker Hughes
Process mining has delivered major savings and now needs better automation and task mining
Collaboration with ERPs should be improved. Compared to SAP Signavio, Celonis is less competitive for BPMN modeling. Deployment flexibility needs enhancement, as on-premises support is not as strong as SaaS support. The most important area for improvement is the automation part. End-to-end automation capabilities are desired. Currently, workflows are being used, but actions should be able to go via email, task, APIs, and ultimately write back to the source. Adding RPA capability that can interact with required systems and write back to the source would greatly enhance Celonis. Task mining capabilities also require improvement. UiPath Process Mining and Microsoft Process Mining have better task mining capabilities compared to Celonis. Usability and support from Celonis need improvement. They should help clients find more value in the product. Cost is another significant concern, as Celonis is very expensive compared to other process mining tools. The license cost should be reduced. Celonis should establish partnerships with clients to find more use cases and maximize the value gained from Celonis.
reviewer1282173 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Useful dashboards, plenty of features, and initial setup simple
We previously worked with other solutions, such as Software AG for process monitoring. It was a good solution. All the products that we worked with have very good functionality. We are mostly working with QPR ProcessAnalyzer, but we may work again with the Software AG process analysis software. QPR ProcessAnalyzer is suited for the mid-scale market while Software AG servers mostly the higher-level market. All the products can work and can do the work for us.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"With the help of data mining, we can identify different costs. Celonis does background research into the data from the different solutions and puts it into the dashboard and so we can see the differences between the pricing over the previous years."
"Celonis is a very good tool, and as for alternatives, it is the best actually in the market."
"It provides seamless unified views with awesome drill down options."
"The solution has very detailed documentation for technical items so it is very easy for developers to use."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. It's very good. It offers good data consistently."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. Celonis is a wonderful tool, so you cannot find any drawbacks at the right moment."
"What I found most valuable in Celonis is the ease of use. I also like that users can compare and contrast and derive any KPIs, keep track and see what's happening within the process via Celonis."
"Celonis has positively impacted my organization as it holds a Titanium partnership with Celonis."
"I have found the most valuable features of QPR ProcessAnalyzer to be Process Discovery, KPIs, definition, and dashboarding. These are the main features we are working on."
"Discovery and root cause analysis"
 

Cons

"The price could be better, but complexity is the biggest problem. Celonis is quite easy to operate once the customizations are done. You need a large amount of skill and knowledge to work with the tool. You need to understand it and know more than the basics."
"The product must focus on training for low-code and no-code people."
"The task mining feature of Celonis needs improvement because it's more challenging than it looks."
"The marketplace should offer process connectors for Oracle JDEdwards, and Peoplesoft."
"It would help if they had more integrations and automation features."
"The UI could be improved."
"It requires specialized expertise to set it up in the backend. I need knowledgeable data and process people who understand the tool and also my processes."
"They could provide artificial intelligence where, based on data they collect from reference cases, they could give us suggestions."
"The user interface of QPR ProcessAnalyzer could improve, it is not very intuitive."
"Communication with clients could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost would be a concern for a certain category of customers. Flexible cost models would help smaller players be able to adapt Celonis into their business operations."
"Though Celonis is a bit pricey, it is worth it."
"The cost of the software for us or the client is on the higher end."
"Celonis is cost-effective."
"I rate Celonis' pricing a ten out of ten because it is expensive."
"It is only affordable for large or public companies."
"Celonis offers free learning possibilities. I am using the free version of Celonis."
"Celonis is expensive. It's not for mid or low-sized enterprises because the license price is high. Overall, it's quite pricey compared to anything else that I have heard about. But the good thing is that they don't charge per user. They charge for the data model."
"The price of QPR ProcessAnalyzer is more competitive compared to other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Mining solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise44
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Signavio Process Manager or Celonis?
SAP Signavio Process Manager is a very robust industrial-grade business process modeling tool. It is easy to use and does not require too much technological involvement. This solution has a collabo...
What do you like most about Celonis?
Celonis, especially for high-risk finance-related processes, helped us make precise decisions and uncover hidden values within our architecture. It was one of the most significant values our busine...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Celonis?
I am not heavily involved in that particular aspect, but I have heard that Celonis is somewhat expensive.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Anheuser-Busch InBev, AXA, Bayer, Cisco, Deloitte, Deutsche Telekom, Hitachi, Kellogg's, Lufthansa, and Whirlpool
Nokia, Ericsson,Solvay,KBC,fortum,Stark Group,Fennovoima,Aalto University,Vaisala,Kemira,Barona,State of Zacatecas,Tata Teleservices,Judiciary of Chile, World Vision, Lithuanian Public Healthcare, Dubai Aluminium,Mitsubishi Gas Chemical Company,University of Latvia,South African Airways
Find out what your peers are saying about Celonis vs. QPR ProcessAnalyzer and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.