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

Celonis vs Tungsten Insight 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)
Tungsten Insight
Ranking in Process Mining
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools (40th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Process Mining category, the mindshare of Celonis is 15.7%, down from 19.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tungsten Insight is 2.1%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Mining Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Celonis15.7%
Tungsten Insight2.1%
Other82.2%
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.
reviewer2005506 - PeerSpot reviewer
Major Account Manager at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Great reporting and customizations with good reliability
A lot of the improvement is not so much the product as it is how it's deployed; it's about mapping against what you need to improve your processes, whether it's the Kofax kind of shows in the IDP. You've got process orchestration, extraction and robotic process automation, process orchestration, and then mobile. Tracking what you need out of those, either all five together or one of those separated out, is usually what's more critical. They do add capabilities to the tool. However, from our perspective as a consulting organization, the real key is whether you are getting the data you need to improve your process or if your reporting is not providing you with the desired information you need to improve your processes. If there's any negative, it's just the different names, the branding names that the product's gone through. It's confusing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provides seamless unified views with awesome drill down options."
"Celonis is a good idea to change the way processes are considered in a company."
"Celonis has helped me to identify and prioritize process improvement areas. Because we understand the end-to-end lead time, including waiting times and areas where rework happens, we can see the performance bottlenecks."
"We can observe the flow and invoices."
"In my opinion, it's quite an advanced tool."
"For the amount of information that it processes, it works relatively fast. I like the visual presentation and the interface is intuitive. I also like that Celonis has a learning academy."
"In my Celonis experience, it is easy to use and has higher AI capabilities."
"The real-time replication was just implemented and is quite useful."
"It provides the ability to design applications directly."
"You can easily customize reporting to pull the fields that interest you."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
 

Cons

"Celonis is good, but it is not comfortable for the India market. I am from India, and the Celonis CPM is not compatible with our country's cybersecurity policy."
"They could provide artificial intelligence where, based on data they collect from reference cases, they could give us suggestions."
"From a development perspective, I think there could be improvements in version control and deployment."
"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."
"Celonis is a little more expensive than UiPath. Maybe they can work on making it less expensive."
"The pricing policy is not affordable in Ukraine."
"With Celonis, the way to use the product is one of the main difficulties users face in our company."
"The technical support is very bad."
"It would be ideal if there were some standard forms that could be customized."
"The initial setup is complex and would be difficult to carry out without any training."
"If there's any negative, it's just the different names, the branding names that the product's gone through. It's confusing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is only affordable for large or public companies."
"Celonis offers free learning possibilities. I am using the free version of Celonis."
"The cost of the software for us or the client is on the higher end."
"The price could be better. If you ask a customer, they will always say it's highly-priced. In my personal opinion, the cost can be at the lower end. I think it's suitable for large organizations at this point in time."
"I was not involved in that, but I am sure it was cost-effective for them. That's why they made the decision to take it."
"Celonis is expensive, but it is functional."
"Celonis is a little more expensive than UiPath."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Mining solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
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
 

Also Known As

No data available
Kofax Insight
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Anheuser-Busch InBev, AXA, Bayer, Cisco, Deloitte, Deutsche Telekom, Hitachi, Kellogg's, Lufthansa, and Whirlpool
Infosys,HMI, krungsri, Cegeka
Find out what your peers are saying about Celonis vs. Tungsten Insight and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.