Ephesoft Transact Reviews

We use Ephesoft Transact to extract invoices for different vendors, the total and invoice table containing the item number, descriptions, total amount, and quantity. We get this kind of data from the invoices and put it into a database. We're also capturing some information in the CSV file and placing the CSV file in SharePoint. 

We also push the data from the database to some legacy applications. We also extract data through an API and transport it to third-party applications like a finance tool related to remittance. We extract the remittance data and keep it. 

These invoices have a separate module called Semantik Transact, which has a template for these invoices. Once you inject the invoice into Semantik Transact, it automatically captures all the information from the invoice. We didn't do the confirmation for the invoice items.

We bought new processes, and in this way, we have expanded with Ephesoft Transact.

I like the inject feature. With desktop injects, we're doing all these things and extracting these things. Its stable, scalable, and technical support is good.

Their email service and extraction could be better. We get the input via email, and these emails contain different types of documents like Excel, PDF, or they may contain different content in the email body. Due to this variation, sometimes the email service crashes, and emails aren't redirected to Ephesoft Transact. 

Ephesoft has provided us with new hotfixes. Whatever flaws we found in the 2019.2 version, they have already updated it in the new version, 20.1.05, and it's already released. Drawbacks like not capturing the handwritten fields are now sorted.

I have been using Ephesoft Transact since March 2020.

Ephesoft Transact is a stable solution.

Ephesoft Transact is scalable. It has a lot of APIs to integrate with different RPA tools, ERP applications, and databases. That kind of scalability is available with this solution. We currently have about ten users, and most of them are OCR developers.

We plan to increase the number of users, and they are getting trained. If the new members are added to this project, our company already has a technical partnership to provide training.

Technical support from the Ephesoft side is very good. If we face any challenging issues, we can raise a ticket with the Ephesoft team, and they will work with us.

The initial setup was straightforward. It took us about 20 minutes to install and deploy this solution. If we deploy it in a client's environment, we test it. We extracted the deployed setup with login credentials. 

They provided some manual tools, and following the steps, we downloaded a copy and installed it. They will also provide support to get the installation done.

Initially, when I got a licensed copy of Ephesoft Transact, it was for one year. After one year, we had to send an email to the Ephesoft team informing them that our license was going to expire. They updated it and provided one license in our file, and we had to update and install the folder. They have versions for one year and lifelong as well.

I would advise potential users that Ephesoft Transact is an easy tool to handle. The UI isn't complex, and even if everything isn't handled at the UI level, they can work with the script. 

You can also handle issues with scripts. I believe Ephesoft Transact is one of the best tools because the UI is an easy one. The UI-level design makes it easy to handle the development and the superior Ephesoft support system.

They will give you quick support to resolve issues and provide training materials. They will train the developer, and after training the developers, they will also support them. That's a good good thing that I saw. Initially, when I joined this project, I also had less knowledge. But with the help of this support system and the training material, I now have superior knowledge.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Ephesoft Transact a nine.

The solution is good for document processing and is easily customizable. It does help classify documents via keywords. It's similar to other solutions. It's not great and not bad.

It's a good tool for processing and it scales quite well. 

The classification capabilities are quite helpful. 

It offers good scripting. 

I have found the keyword extraction to be helpful. 

Reporting is okay.

Machine learning is easy to use and train.  Once you train the system, you get good accuracy.

It is easy to use, and the UI is very good. 

The pricing is fair. 

It is mostly stable. 

The one time I used technical support, they were responsive. 

The configuration can be a bit much.

The AML engine part could be better. It's not easy to train. It's not so easy to train the system. If it's not trained, the accuracy will be off. They need to improve data quality. They need to start from scratch with the AML. 

They need to add on the document processing tool. It's getting there; it just need to be expanded. 

I haven't used the reporting too much. However, it would be helpful to have it more robust.

The solution does require a lot of RAM. 

I've used the solution for four or five years. 

The stability is not too bad. The results you get depend on the use case. There are no bugs or glitches. It may require more memory or RAM, however, it's fine. 

I'd rate the stability six out of ten. 

Scaling is very easy. I'd rate the scalability six out of ten. It's not a container-based system. You can, however, scale up the servers and add to the processing. 

I simply used the solution myself. There were not a lot of users. 

I did rise one issue, and they were very proactive, however, I have not used technical support a lot. It's hard to rate them based on one experience. 

I've used Google Cloud Vision, Azure, and KTE. They are all a bit different. For Azure, for example, it's not a workflow. While the classification is the same, the extraction is better. Yet Azure is not a complete solution, whereas this solution is. 

The setup for Windows is quite simple. However, for Linux, it takes time to deal with dependencies. When you have the cloud, scaling is easy. I'd rate the ease of setup six out of ten. 

The deployment, if it is on a single server, for Windows, might take 15 minutes and Linux might take one or two hours, depending on dependencies. 

I handled the deployment myself. 

The pricing is fair. It's not too expensive. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

I'm a consultant. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. It is an average solution with good workflows and has good customization capabilities. It just lacks on the machine learning side. 

Transact is primarily used to import and export documents, for claims handling, and mail distribution control. 

Transact's best feature is its ease of customization.

Transact could be improved by removing Java and making its pricing more accessible for smaller customers.

I've been using Transact for six years.

Transact is stable.

Transact is scalable.

Ephesoft's technical support is medium - I've seen better and worse.

The initial setup was easy. The standard setup can be handled in a couple of days, but if the customer has specialized needs, it will take around two weeks. 

Transact's pricing could be better for smaller customers.

I would advise anybody considering implementing Transact to pick the right supplier unless they have very skilled IT people who can handle the product. I would give Transact a rating of nine out of ten for its flexibility and integration.