Nintex Workflow

Name: Nintex Workflow
Brand: Nintex
Rating: 4.2 (2198 reviews)

We help businesses power endless possibilities.

Est 2006|Valuation $460M|Raised $21M

LinkedIn 61K|Website|Web traffic 61K|FTEs 1,179|HQ Bellevue, Washington, US

MarketsBusiness Process Management (BPM)Workflow Automation Agent Builder Platforms

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Nintex vs Power Automate (where each is commonly selected): - Power Automate is often the default choice for Microsoft customers due to native integration and publicly documented pricing tiers. - Nintex is often selected when organizations have established usage of its workflow tooling across SharePoint or when they require integrated capabilities across forms, document generation, and process management that are already in use. - A recurring buyer risk for Nintex is that native Microsoft capabilities continue to evolve, which can reduce the value gap for basic approvals/forms workflows. Nintex vs Kissflow (commercial model and adoption): - Kissflow publishes pricing tiers and positions itself around simpler commercial packaging with platform-level tiers. - Organizations requiring budget predictability may prefer vendors with simpler, publicly documented pricing. Market adoption signals (directional): - Review platform category placements vary by methodology. Placement as a "contender" in some no-code platform reports indicates presence in the market but should be interpreted relative to each analyst's criteria.

	Nintex Workflow	Microsoft Power Automate	Kissflow
Starting Price (public list)	Commonly quote-based; third-party estimates exist for illustrative purposes	Public pricing examples include per-user and per-bot tiering (refer to vendor pricing pages)	Vendor publishes starting tiers (refer to vendor pricing page)
Best For	Organizations needing governed workflow, forms, and document generation across Microsoft and other systems; legacy SharePoint-heavy estates	Microsoft 365-centric automation and native Microsoft integration	Teams seeking a simpler packaged workflow/low-code platform with clearer published tiers
Key Strength	Established workflow/forms capabilities and a broad product suite across related automation functions	Tight integration with the Microsoft ecosystem and publicly documented pricing tiers	Simpler commercial packaging and a platform approach that can simplify adoption
Key Weakness	Licensing complexity and operational issues in some SharePoint on‑prem scenarios; mixed support reports	Licensing nuances for premium connectors and governance at scale	May be less suited for highly complex regulated enterprise orchestration compared with heavier BPM suites

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Nintex vs Power Automate (where each is commonly selected):

Power Automate is often the default choice for Microsoft customers due to native integration and publicly documented pricing tiers.
Nintex is often selected when organizations have established usage of its workflow tooling across SharePoint or when they require integrated capabilities across forms, document generation, and process management that are already in use.
A recurring buyer risk for Nintex is that native Microsoft capabilities continue to evolve, which can reduce the value gap for basic approvals/forms workflows.

Nintex vs Kissflow (commercial model and adoption):

Kissflow publishes pricing tiers and positions itself around simpler commercial packaging with platform-level tiers.
Organizations requiring budget predictability may prefer vendors with simpler, publicly documented pricing.

Market adoption signals (directional):

Review platform category placements vary by methodology. Placement as a "contender" in some no-code platform reports indicates presence in the market but should be interpreted relative to each analyst's criteria.

	Nintex Workflow	Microsoft Power Automate	Kissflow
Starting Price (public list)	Commonly quote-based; third-party estimates exist for illustrative purposes	Public pricing examples include per-user and per-bot tiering (refer to vendor pricing pages)	Vendor publishes starting tiers (refer to vendor pricing page)
Best For	Organizations needing governed workflow, forms, and document generation across Microsoft and other systems; legacy SharePoint-heavy estates	Microsoft 365-centric automation and native Microsoft integration	Teams seeking a simpler packaged workflow/low-code platform with clearer published tiers
Key Strength	Established workflow/forms capabilities and a broad product suite across related automation functions	Tight integration with the Microsoft ecosystem and publicly documented pricing tiers	Simpler commercial packaging and a platform approach that can simplify adoption
Key Weakness	Licensing complexity and operational issues in some SharePoint on‑prem scenarios; mixed support reports	Licensing nuances for premium connectors and governance at scale	May be less suited for highly complex regulated enterprise orchestration compared with heavier BPM suites