UiPath vs IBM RPA (2023): Detailed Comparison of 13 Features

Robotic process automation (RPA) is transforming how companies operate by automating repetitive, rules-based tasks. RPA adoption is accelerating, with 64% of organizations now pursuing RPA at an enterprise-wide level according to Deloitte.

But with so many RPA vendors to choose from, how do you decide? Based on funding and popularity, UiPath is the dominant player. However, IBM offers a formidable RPA solution as well.

I compared UiPath and IBM RPA across 13 categories that matter to end users. For an unbiased assessment, I awarded points based on which platform had more positive reviews from real users for each criterion.

Let‘s see how they stack up.

1. Cost

The RPA platform you choose needs to fit your budget. IBM‘s starter pack is $840 compared to UiPath‘s at $420.

At first glance, UiPath seems more affordable. However, IBM offers more bundled licenses in their starter pack. And UiPath users complain about unpredictable and high annual costs after purchase (Review 1).

Review 1: UiPath user complaining about high annual costs after purchase

In contrast, IBM RPA‘s licensing is metered based on usage volume. This provides greater flexibility to align costs with business needs (Review 2).

Review 2: IBM user praising flexible, usage-based pricing model

For more predictable long-term costs, IBM wins this category.

Winner: IBM

2. Cognitive Capability

Cognitive capabilities like machine learning allow bots to improve over time with limited human oversight.

IBM RPA incorporates decent ML and AI to enable intelligent process automation (Review 3).

Review 3: IBM user citing good machine learning capability

However, RPA can have over 100 use cases across industries. Some UiPath users found the cognitive features lacking for niche tasks (Review 4).

Review 4: UiPath user disappointed with ML on unique oil and gas industry tasks

For stronger out-of-the-box cognitive capabilities, IBM has an edge here.

Winner: IBM

3. Debugging Capability

Debugging helps identify and fix implementation issues during RPA testing. According to surveys, performance problems are a top RPA pitfall faced by adopters. Weak debugging drags down efficiency and slows deployments.

Unfortunately, neither vendor shines here. IBM RPA users say debugging documentation is limited (Review 5).

Review 5: IBM RPA user wanting better debugging docs

UiPath users also complain debugging issues aren‘t resolved quickly (Review 6).

Review 6: UiPath user citing poor customer experience resolving debugging problems

This category is a wash between the two platforms.

Winner: Tie

4. OCR Functionality

OCR enables data extraction from documents without human intervention. This is critical for automating document-heavy processes like accounting and claims processing.

IBM‘s optical character recognition capabilities are decent. But the tool lacks multi-language support beyond English which limits usability for global companies (Review 7).

Review 7: IBM user wanting multi-lingual OCR

UiPath‘s OCR is sometimes inaccurate leading to costly errors (Review 8).

Review 8: UiPath user citing inaccurate OCR output

However, UiPath nets more positive OCR reviews overall. With better global language support, they win this round.

Winner: UiPath

5. Process Mining Integration

Process mining complements RPA by visually mapping processes to identify automation opportunities.

In previous analysis, IBM edged out UiPath for stronger process mining capabilities like advanced process intelligence, notation, and analysis.

The IBM solution delivers a more integrated process mining experience for discovering and prioritizing automation potential (Review 9).

Review 9: User citing IBM‘s seamless process mining integration

Winner: IBM

6. Customer Support

Customer experience is crucial for retaining users long-term.

On Gartner peer reviews, IBM and UiPath offer similar customer service levels (Review 10).

Review 10: Roughly equal Gartner scores for IBM and UiPath support

However, on G2, IBM scores significantly higher at 9.6 versus UiPath‘s 8.8 out of 10. This implies IBM resolves tickets faster.

Winner: IBM

7. Ease of Setup/Deployment

Simple setup and deployment drives user adoption across the organization.

IBM users find their platform quicker and easier for building and deploying automations (Review 11). This enables faster time-to-value.

Review 11: IBM user citing easy bot deployment

By comparison, UiPath users cite issues like studio crashes, browser integration limitations, and tool picker problems that complicate deployments (Review 12).

Review 12: UiPath user listing multiple deployment problems faced

IBM also seems to do a better job with release management based on user feedback.

Winner: IBM

8. No-Code Functionality

No-code RPA enables citizen automators to build bots with minimal programming. Both tools rank highly here.

With features like screen recording, drag-and-drop editing, and process templates, IBM edges out UiPath for easier bot building by non-developers (Review 13). This enables broader citizen automation.

Review 13: IBM beating UiPath on ease of no-code bot building

Winner: IBM

9. Bot Management

Bot management encompasses scheduling, monitoring, auditing, and security capabilities.

IBM provides superior attended vs unattended bot support, analytics, compliance, and oversight functionality relative to UiPath (Review 14).

Review 14: IBM outperforming on bot management capabilities

Winner: IBM

10. Scalability

Scalability allows an RPA platform to take on more processes and higher data volumes easily.

UiPath has more large enterprise customers with over 1000 employees compared to IBM‘s small business user base. This suggests UiPath can scale better for automating large process volumes (Review 15).

Review 15: UiPath‘s strong enterprise presence indicates scalability

Winner: UiPath

11. Language Support

Wider language support removes localization barriers to RPA adoption across global organizations.

IBM RPA supports 7 languages – English, Chinese, French, Japanese, Spanish, Portuguese, and Korean.

UiPath only supports 4 languages – English, French, Japanese, and Russian.

For accommodating more languages out-of-the-box, IBM wins.

Winner: IBM

12. Industry Suitability

Ensure the vendor has proven success automating processes specific to your industry.

IBM RPA sees adoption primarily across:

• IT
• Telecom
• Consumer Services/Sales
• Retail
• Management Consulting

UiPath has strong penetration in:

• IT
• Computer Software
• Financial Services
• Telecom
• Pharmaceuticals

Both serve a diverse customer base. I won‘t pick a winner here as it depends on your industry.

Winner: Tie

13. OS Support

With rising Mac adoption, RPA tools should support macOS beyond Windows.

UiPath doesn‘t offer native Mac support (Review 16). Users must utilize roundabout methods like remote desktops to use UiPath Studio.

Review 16: User complaining about UiPath‘s lack of native macOS support

IBM also lacks native macOS integration but provides cloud-based Windows virtualization to run IBM RPA on Macs seamlessly (Review 17).

Review 17: IBM‘s virtual Windows desktop enables smoother Mac experience

With easier Mac access via the cloud, IBM wins for broader OS support.

Winner: IBM

Final Score

IBM RPA edges out UiPath with 8 wins over 3. IBM beats UiPath on costs, cognitive capabilities, customer support, ease of use, no-code, bot management, language support, and OS support.

UiPath‘s strengths are in OCR, scalability, and overall brand reputation. But IBM RPA emerges as the better platform based on user experiences and features that enable sustainable, enterprise-wide automation.

Key Recommendations

Based on this analysis, I recommend:

• Global companies or those with multi-lingual needs choose IBM for broader language support
• Organizations wanting flexible pricing models prefer IBM‘s metered approach
• Heavily document-based industries like insurance and finance pick UiPath for superior OCR
• Larger organizations with expansive processes standardize on UiPath for scalability
• Companies with stringent compliance requirements select IBM for robust auditing and monitoring

Make sure to closely evaluate your unique requirements. For most, IBM RPA aligns better to enterprise needs. But UiPath still leads in mindshare, community support, and VC funding.

Implementing RPA is an long-term investment. Assess both tools thoroughly through free trials to pick the right technology partner.