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

Microsoft Power Apps vs WaveMaker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 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

Microsoft Power Apps
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
1st
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WaveMaker
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
31st
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Rapid Application Development Software category, the mindshare of Microsoft Power Apps is 7.8%, down from 13.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WaveMaker is 1.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Rapid Application Development Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Power Apps7.8%
WaveMaker1.5%
Other90.7%
Rapid Application Development Software
 

Featured Reviews

BS
Automation Enthusiast at Self employed
Low-code AI workflows have streamlined content curation and currently support rapid app creation
Microsoft Power Apps could be improved because there are still a lot of jargons and too many moving parts. For example, if you look at Copilot, the term Copilot is confusing in the sense of whether it is Copilot in M365, Copilot Studio, or Copilot in Microsoft Power Apps. There is a plan designer which uses Copilot. The whole thing how AI has been positioned is still not lucid for the end user. An end user wants to know exactly what they want and where they go to get it. I think that could also be because things are evolving so fast. From an end-user perspective, the way it has been positioned, the clarity and the boundaries between the different types of offerings and AI offerings available is confusing as of now. There should be better clarity on that. The biggest issue I have, and I have also spoken to a few of my clients about this, is the licensing model. In traditional software development, almost 95 percent of the time, the development team bears the cost of the licenses. For example, if I develop something, I may have to pay licenses for four or five different software that I use. As a user, if you use my services, you probably pay something to me as a subscription, but you do not have to bother about the licenses. All that is wrapped under the hood. Unfortunately, in Power Platform as such, and even in other low-code things like UiPath, if you use a premium feature such as Dataverse, almost everything ends up using Dataverse or SQL Server or some relational database. If you use that, then as an app builder or app maker you have to have a premium license. The end user too would need to have a premium license. That really makes the adoption prohibitive. It is too expensive. We are talking about something like around just for Microsoft Power Apps alone, approximately twenty dollars per month, which is extremely high. Another point to consider for what else can be improved in Microsoft Power Apps is that one does not know what compute power one is getting when one buys a license. If you look at the licensing model, you will get to know how much of Dataverse storage you will get in terms of log storage, database storage, and file storage. However, you do not get to know how much of compute power is being given to you. I do not think Microsoft has an SLA saying that any request of a certain amount, such as MB per second, you will get a response time of whatever, one by sixtieth of a second or some millisecond. I do not think that they have that performance SLA in place. They do have storage SLA which comes with the license, but they do not have a corresponding SLA for performance.
it_user576294 - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Software Developer at a tech services company
This is a RAD tool to build business apps, tables, and forms.
It needs a desktop version for developers with license type CE. I would like to have the possibility to have a CE that lets me migrate from SQL Server Express, Access, and OpenOffice Base and keep all UI front-end development in just one system. In short, the 6.7 was good enough. The question is: Will there always be a desktop version CE that will let me work with, for example, five users for free, and then start to pay from user six, or in my case, three users? Right now, I do not see WaveMaker in this field, and there are others points to ask for from a desktop.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It helps bring together data and processes that are spread across different systems because of its high integration capabilities."
"If you want something that you can use for cellphones, multiple tablets, and things like that, you can use PowerApps for the front end. It gathers all the information, and the information goes somewhere else."
"The solution offers good integration on the Microsoft Power platform, helps automate processes, allows us to monitor and track with Power BI, and is very easy to set up, stable, and scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the simple data connectivity components."
"Flexibility, easy setup, and fairly quick results are valuable features of the product."
"I would say that it's a very advanced product because it empowers people to do simple things, which previously may have required people to have some technical skills."
"I like the containerization of Azure."
"I'd advise people to consider working with the product; it works very well with the other products of Microsoft in general and integrates with Microsoft Teams and other apps, which is helpful if you use a lot of Microsoft."
"It is a Rapid Application Development (RAD) tool to build business apps that lets you work with many diverse data stores and build tables and forms easily."
 

Cons

"One area for improvement in the platform is enhancing the user experience, especially for less tech-savvy users, by simplifying complex features and controls."
"One of the major problems with it is what PowerApps calls the delegation warning. Regardless of what platform, data source, et cetera, that you're using, you can't retrieve more than 2000 records."
"The solution is evolving very fast and every month new features are introduced. Sometimes it's difficult to catch up with all the evolution that's happening. I had to focus on Power BI for a while and left PowerApps at the side for a couple of months and when I came back, it had changed its interface and moved components around."
"You cannot scale with PowerApps. PowerApps is still very much a point solution."
"The solution must provide more integration with third-party applications."
"You need to be familiar with Microsoft Power Apps' infrastructure. If you understand Power Apps, it becomes easy to use; otherwise, it may seem challenging."
"The documentation isn't great. It's only 75% of what you need to know. If you go beyond that and run into issues, it's really not going to help you."
"Improvements could include more templates for application development, especially those commonly used across different companies."
"It needs a desktop version for developers with license type CE."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the Office 365 package, and Microsoft PowerApps is a part of the package. We don't pay any separate price for this. There are no additional costs. We just pay for the Office 365 package."
"The platform's pricing is reasonable."
"The product is inexpensive."
"Microsoft Power Apps is not an expensive solution."
"The pricing is too expensive and the licensing system is complicated. There are many pages of instruction on how to do the calculations for the price."
"The tool is neither cheap nor expensive. The tool's cost is manageable."
"We would advise organizations that this solution has a high-price point. However, the cost is justified for how comprehensive the package is, and all components of the solution are available under the standard license plan; there are no hidden costs involved."
"Microsoft PowerApps is expensive, but there are many features included."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise53
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How would you choose between Microsoft PowerApps and Salesforce Platform?
I think it depends on your use case. If your organization uses Microsoft Enterprise products, PowerApps will work better in your environment. Similarly, if you have a Salesforce integration in pla...
Would you choose ServiceNow over Microsoft PowerApps?
Hi Netanya, I will choose ServiceNow because ServiceNow is a very good tool compared to Microsoft PowerApp. Because ServiceNow has a very strong module (Performance Analysis) reporting which will ...
Would you choose Microsoft Azure App Service or PowerApps?
Microsoft Azure App Service is helpful if you need to set up temporary servers for customers to run their programs in locations that other cloud providers do not cater to. When servers are closer t...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

PowerApps, MS PowerApps
Pramati
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransAlta, Rackspace, Telstra
Vanenburg, Flanagan
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, ServiceNow, Oracle and others in Rapid Application Development Software. Updated: May 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.