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

QPR ProcessAnalyzer vs UiPath Process Mining 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

QPR ProcessAnalyzer
Ranking in Process Mining
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
UiPath Process Mining
Ranking in Process Mining
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Process Mining category, the mindshare of QPR ProcessAnalyzer is 1.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Process Mining is 6.8%, down from 9.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Mining
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1282173 - PeerSpot reviewer
Discovery and root cause analysis are key benefits; its own dashboard is a standout feature
I think the company has the technology for continued improvement of its communications, the one-on-one with clients. They have improved their software over time but there is still more to be done, particularly with the user interface. They could include numerous additional features but I'm not sure if we are in a position to utilize them. The solution could be more flexible and intuitive.
Rahul Sharma. - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable solution with a comparison feature that helps people to understand and visualize the impact of a particular task
UiPath Process Mining is as lightweight a tool as it is new. It's not able to handle a lot of logs in one go at high speed. The solution's speed is fairly good, but it should be further increased to make it more powerful to process large amounts of logs. Logs should be as much as possible. We have taken one year's and sometimes two years' logs to understand the behavior. We are not here solving small problems because a lot of money is invested. I have observed that handling a large amount of logs slows down the solution's performance. This area is improving because we are now observing a new version of UiPath Process Mining with improved speed. As a developer, I'll be happy to see that happening more quickly, and I am sure the solution is heading there.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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"
"One of the reasons we have gone with UiPath is because it was a business decision and because our company subscribes to the UiPath automation suite, which includes RPA, etc. We thought it would be efficient to keep everything on the same platform."
"We find the solution to be really easy not just for development purposes, but also for its use and ability to be understood."
"The visualization part, showing the number of cases processed successfully after a process is executed, is the most valuable. It also showed how effective a bot is after production. This kind of analysis that we got from UiPath Process Mining was good."
"If the end user is happy, it means I am happy."
"We find the solution is scalable."
"It provides root cause analysis, which identifies delays and deviations in processes, visualizes bottlenecks, and assesses their impact with insightful visualizations."
"The solution counts the number of cross-sections at each step of the year which allows you to see all the data to figure out what is happening in the company. You do not need to manually collect data, it continuously updates the data. Overall the solution is easy to use and has dashboards."
"The most valuable feature of UiPath Process Mining is the comparison feature."
 

Cons

"The user interface of QPR ProcessAnalyzer could improve, it is not very intuitive."
"Communication with clients could be improved."
"It would be helpful to make the spy modules more accurate."
"There is always a challenge with the infrastructure set up for the client."
"That depends whether I can get the input information to explain why the exceptions are happening. Is it because of different policies or incorrect procedure being applied? If that information would also being integrated as part of it, it would make my life easier."
"The technical support for UiPath Process Mining needs some improvement."
"I have found UiPath Process Mining to be a very complex tool to use. They could improve the OCR recognition feature."
"The ability to transform raw data into actionable information can be challenging due to the variability in our customers' processes."
"I rate the setup cost as four to five. It is a high price for a low rating."
"Setting up UiPath is relatively complex. It potentially involves multiple business units. First, you need to set up the connectors. If you want to analyze enterprise performance, you will have to do enterprise connectors, which means you must deal with different system owners, security, and things like that. That can get complicated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of QPR ProcessAnalyzer is more competitive compared to other solutions."
"The price of the solution could be lower. However, Automation Anywhere is approximately $8,000, and when comparing these solutions, UiPath Process Mining is less expensive. The license for the solution is purchased annually."
"We are using the Community Version of UiPath and have only a single process automated."
"The cost of UiPath Process Mining is costly but there are no additional costs in addition to the licensing fee."
"UiPath's licensing is based on how many documents we process using this solution."
"The price of UiPath Process Mining could improve."
"Compared to other solutions such as Power Automate, UiPath is significantly more expensive, with its pro plan starting at $420 per month."
"Licensing costs are on an annual basis."
"There is an annual subscription. It could be cheaper in my opinion, but it is still more affordable than other OEMs. This solution probably would not be ideal for people in the startup environment."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Mining solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Educational Organization
71%
Computer Software Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Manufacturing Company
3%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about UiPath Process Mining?
I would rate the stability of UiPath Process Mining a nine out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Process Mining?
UiPath Process Mining is positioned on the expensive tier, with enterprise-level plans being costly. Compared to other solutions such as Power Automate, UiPath is significantly more expensive, with...
What needs improvement with UiPath Process Mining?
One area for improvement is the integration with legacy systems, which can be challenging, especially with older and in-house developed systems that lack good event logs. The setup for process mini...
 

Also Known As

No data available
ProcessGold
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
Lotte Corporation, LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Sunway Group, Deloitte, Heritage Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about QPR ProcessAnalyzer vs. UiPath Process Mining and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.