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

GeneXus vs WorkflowGen comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 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

GeneXus
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
20th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Mobile Development Platforms (10th)
WorkflowGen
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
36th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (27th), Business Process Management (BPM) (39th), Process Automation (41st), Rapid Application Development Software (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Low-Code Development Platforms category, the mindshare of GeneXus is 1.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WorkflowGen is 1.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Low-Code Development Platforms Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
GeneXus1.1%
WorkflowGen1.7%
Other97.2%
Low-Code Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

XavierEspinoza - PeerSpot reviewer
Internal System Coordinator at Red CEDIA
Offers a simplified architecture with outstanding integration capabilities
The integration capabilities of GeneXus are highly valuable for our organization. The metadata obtained within the logic of different systems is also vital. Due to the solution, our company team doesn't have to work with multiple languages and integrations can be made with C Sharp. JavaScript can also be used with GeneXus, the tool takes charge of all the rest and has a simple architecture. The solution can be used out of the box without facing any issues and nothing much needs to be done with frameworks. In our case we need to use Python with GeneXus, we use Ironpython to embed python code in C# .
CO
SAP Solution Lead at Johnson & Johnson
Good for automatically triggering workflows, but needs to be more customizable
We use this product for many different reasons related to our business We use it a lot for creating workflows to transfer materials between plants, which is a signature part of what we do. The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically trigger the workflow. This solution needs to be…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the testing models, which allow me to create unit or interface tests of my programs. It helps us avoid missed deadlines because we can detect all the errors before deploying the new versions of the solution. And I also like the integration with coding managers like DevOps or Jenkins. It enables us to do versioning."
"The solution provides ease of programming and the speed of delivery of demands."
"The front-end features are the most valuable."
"After you go through the learning process, this solution works extremely quickly in terms of enabling an application in a production environment."
"The integration capabilities of GeneXus are highly valuable for our organization"
"I like that it's very compatible with other tools. The most important feature is getting the developer to focus on the project's business case. It's not about focusing on how I can command this or how I can develop a front end, or how I can work with the advantages. The developer should focus on the business case of the project. No need to focus on connecting the database to the server or connecting the server and the front end. The developer can concentrate on the views."
"With the solution, I can work a normal day. I can plan my work and any other activities for days ahead."
"It is fast in creating systems and connects to the database quickly, so we can invest more time in resolving the problem and focusing on the cause."
"We use it a lot for creating workflows to transfer materials between plants, which is a signature part of what we do."
"It’s easier, more controlled and automatized checks of the budget through this system."
"Took few hours to build workflows with ready-to-use templates, so we had improved productivity."
 

Cons

"The graphical interface could be improved. I also notice some performance problems on hardware that should be more than adequate. GeneXus uses a lot of RAM and other computer resources."
"We would like to see more extensions and more user controls added to the front-end of this solution, in order to help developers manage the website."
"I told them to add something about Angular. They're already working on adding it."
"GeneXus is a wonderful tool for the backend. It's the best in the world, but for the frontend, GeneXus needs to improve. There should be easier steps for managing various aspects, such as alerts and messages to show to the end-users."
"It would be helpful if the company would provide additional assisted processing with training, more instances where you can find training."
"It's expensive for a company."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The tool needs to be tuned before being used. You need some experience to get the best out of the tool."
"This solution needs to be more customizable."
"The reports for users. The reports with more details; we have to generate them by the database."
"Yes, for email notification but it could also be with company network."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution offers multi-plan licenses, depending on the size of the company and the features required, as opposed to being priced per user/device."
"People tend to work with GeneXus if it's cheap, but GeneXus does have licensing policies...Moreover, the cost of resourcing work in GeneXus may make it more expensive than other programming languages."
"The tool's price is good."
"The price is good."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten"
"It's expensive. I'd rate it a four out of ten in terms of pricing."
"The solution is very expensive."
"I don't know about the price because I am an employee, but I hear it's cheaper than other tools."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Low-Code Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Large Enterprise2
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with GeneXus?
GeneXus needs to be more consistent in functionality without any errors. Code generation is highly time-consuming for GeneXus, but in some cases, it saves time as well. Some errors will take too lo...
What is your primary use case for GeneXus?
Our company uses the latest version of GeneXus. The solution is used in our company to develop various enterprise systems, and GeneXus is used as an integrator, which further facilitates low-cost d...
What advice do you have for others considering GeneXus?
The tool's use case depends upon the requirements. The solution is ideal for integrations to modernize systems. GeneXus is also used in a site to develop systems with functional programming for big...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Canal de Panamá, Gerdau, Coca-Cola, Mercado Libre, DHL, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, TECNISA, Mexican Polak Group, Ferrovalle, Canon, Azteca, KPMG, TURBUS, Santander, BBVA
Comcast, Deloitte, Mitsui & Co Ltd, Sanofi Pasteur, Textron, XL Group. WorkflowGen accelerates business process adaptability in 70 countries for 500+ organizations and 1,000,000 users.
Find out what your peers are saying about GeneXus vs. WorkflowGen and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.