

Make and SS&C Blue Prism compete as automation tools. Users prefer Make for its pricing and support, while SS&C Blue Prism is favored for its comprehensive features and perceived value for money.
Features: Make supports a flexible, low-code environment, providing a vast library of integrations, time-saving automation, and a reliable performance interface. SS&C Blue Prism offers robust automation abilities, secure data handling, email automation, efficient workflow creation, and the ability to handle large volumes of data with ease.
Room for Improvement: Make could simplify complex features, address pricing issues tied to operational consumption, and enhance security and performance speed. SS&C Blue Prism needs better cost efficiency, enhanced object recognition, and user-friendly documentation to improve integration capabilities.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Make primarily supports deployment via Public Cloud and On-premises, offering responsive and friendly support. SS&C Blue Prism provides flexible deployment options, including Private Cloud, Hybrid Cloud, and On-premises, but some users find its support less accessible.
Pricing and ROI: Make is cost-effective, delivering substantial ROI through time savings and client retention. SS&C Blue Prism is cost-effective for larger businesses, although higher costs may challenge small entities, yet provides a straightforward setup and promising ROI for larger users.
I have indeed seen a return on investment as it has saved us hundreds of hours in repetitive tasks, streamlining our follow-up to the leads that we are generating.
I implemented a booking system for my client that previously required data to be entered directly into Google Sheets and reminders to be sent manually; using Make, they have saved about 50% of their time, which equals one labor resource, translating to a significant amount of money saved.
With that extra time each month, I could focus more on sales and upscaling my business, so it is really worth it.
It saved a lot of money, with 50 to 60% of our cost saved, especially through automation.
I have more time to work on meaningful tasks since automation has been very helpful in automating repetitive and time-consuming tasks.
We have escalated a few issues that we faced during some integrations, and we received reasonable responses from Make support.
They were doing the best job for my use cases and my problems.
When I had a problem during the pricing payment, the customer support handled it very well.
They provide very detailed responses that enable us to handle any issues effectively.
Our team manages security and compliance by storing data for five years, archiving logs older than seven days while maintaining backups, and implementing strict logging practices.
The response times were slow to turn around.
When you have an error, it is very hard to do error handling and debugging.
It can handle increasing workloads or more complex automations easily, but I need to set up each and every component carefully.
Make's scalability is very good, and if the pricing were lower, I could scale a lot more.
It is scalable from the solution perspective.
I found it to be high on stability, and I would rate it at nine.
The solution is generally stable, though we have faced issues with increased transaction loads causing latency and occasional hang-ups.
There should be clarity about whether the data is secure while passing through these automations or integrations created within Make.
I would love to have more detailed logs, step-by-step error tracing, and better visualization of failed executions, as I think it would improve the user experience significantly.
The lagging problem needs to be solved.
It was not developed in a consumption-based manner, however, rather in a fixed-price licensing model that did not account for volumes.
Licensing was affordable.
I found a solution that allows me to use Make almost for free, just using the Docker on-premises.
It's cost-effective and it's pocket-friendly.
The pricing model was not modern, as it wasn't designed on a consumption basis or as a service basis.
The licensing cost can be a bit expensive compared to its competitors.
Overall, my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that for large organizations and medium organizations, it is very cost-effective.
Make has positively impacted my organization by enabling us to solve use cases for hundreds of clients across hundreds of different platforms, providing the customization capabilities to automate accounting and invoicing processes that save dozens of man-hours a month, and allowing us to build custom churn, retention, and engagement costs that have driven a 30% reduction in churn.
Instead of spending several days implementing and testing API integrations inside our FastAPI back end, I was able to build the workflows in a few hours using Make.
The task that I would complete in a span of one day is completed in a matter of minutes by using Make.
I find the design studio, where I can build the automation, to be the most useful.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Make | 1.6% |
| SS&C Blue Prism | 1.8% |
| Other | 96.6% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 14 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 1 |
| Large Enterprise | 6 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 3 |
| Large Enterprise | 8 |
Make is a robust automation platform that streamlines workflows, connecting apps to enhance productivity. Tailored for tech-savvy users, it offers dynamic automation solutions that optimize processes and facilitate seamless integration of disparate systems.
At its core, Make empowers businesses to automate tasks through an intuitive builder with drag-and-drop capabilities. Ideal for professionals who need to integrate systems efficiently, it supports a wide range of applications, aiding in the creation of complex workflows without the need for extensive coding. Users value its adaptability, making it a popular choice for enhancing operational efficiency.
What features does Make offer?In industries like retail and technology, Make has become essential for automating inventory management, order processing, and customer relationship tasks. Companies leverage its capacity to connect multiple databases, CRM systems, and sales platforms, driving growth and operational excellence.
SS&C Blue Prism, renowned for its language capabilities and workflow design, supports detailed automation building, enhancing productivity. Despite some challenges like cost and limited integration, it offers substantial potential in automating diverse processes.
SS&C Blue Prism offers strong capabilities in document reading and a straightforward workflow design, making it accessible with basic BPM knowledge. Detailed automation design in the studio and effective monitoring in the control room are notable features. While facing higher costs and a steeper learning curve, it supports process mining and generative AI initiatives, crucial for industries aiming at transformation and activation services. Limited external system integration and lack of agile delivery encourage a strategic approach in its deployment.
What are the key features?
What ROI should users expect?
SS&C Blue Prism finds its application across industries. In service industries, it automates repetitive tasks while supporting migration projects. Within the insurance sector, it helps automate claims handling and pricing by integrating data efficiently. Companies use it when transitioning processes, such as upgrading systems from older versions to new applications.
We monitor all Process Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.