SAP Build

Name: SAP Build
Brand: SAP
Rating: 4.3 (252 reviews)

Leader

We bring out the best in every business.

Est 1972|Valuation $254.5B|Raised $495.9M

LinkedIn 180K|Website|Web traffic 12.5M|FTEs 2,432|HQ Walldorf, Germany

MarketsBusiness Process Management (BPM)Workflow Automation Low-Code Development Platforms

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Where SAP Build tends to demonstrate advantages - SAP-centric extension scenarios (approvals, forms, workflow around SAP transactions) - Organizations aligning with SAP’s "clean core" posture - Teams that prefer SAP as the primary control plane for extensions rather than a third-party platform Where competitors often demonstrate advantages - **Power Platform**: in environments already standardized on Microsoft identity, M365, and Azure; often faster initial adoption due to existing skills and ubiquitous licensing pathways. - **Mendix**: positioned as a more general-purpose low-code application development platform with maturity across non-SAP developer audiences. Evidence of competitive pressure - Industry commentary notes SAP Build entered a crowded market, and many SAP customers already use Microsoft Power Platform or Mendix—indicating SAP Build generally competes for adoption within existing SAP accounts rather than displacing entrenched low-code platforms.

	SAP Build	Microsoft Power Platform	Mendix
Starting Price	SAP publishes per-user and per-developer pricing; additional runtime/capacity charges apply and published pricing should be validated with the vendor	Multiple SKUs across Power Apps and Power Automate; published per-app and per-user pricing examples are provided in Microsoft's licensing documentation and should be validated for your scenario	Free tier plus paid tiers; published monthly pricing varies by plan, capacity, and features and should be validated with the vendor
Primary Use Case	SAP-centric enterprises extending S/4HANA and SAP apps with governance/clean-core	Microsoft-heavy environments (M365/Azure) needing broad low-code + automation + connectors	Enterprise low-code app development, including cross-system apps; platform maturity outside SAP ecosystem
Key Strength	SAP-native integration + SAP governance narrative + suite scope (apps + automation + workspace)	Breadth of adoption, ecosystem, integration with M365/Azure, mature citizen-dev motion	Mature LCAP with strong app lifecycle features; widely used outside SAP ecosystem
Key Weakness	Complexity beyond templates; non-SAP integration friction; licensing/TCO sprawl risk	Licensing complexity and request limits/overages; governance can still be challenging at scale	Can require meaningful platform expertise; enterprise pricing can rise quickly for mission-critical/scale

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Where SAP Build tends to demonstrate advantages

SAP-centric extension scenarios (approvals, forms, workflow around SAP transactions)
Organizations aligning with SAP’s "clean core" posture
Teams that prefer SAP as the primary control plane for extensions rather than a third-party platform

Where competitors often demonstrate advantages

Power Platform: in environments already standardized on Microsoft identity, M365, and Azure; often faster initial adoption due to existing skills and ubiquitous licensing pathways.
Mendix: positioned as a more general-purpose low-code application development platform with maturity across non-SAP developer audiences.

Evidence of competitive pressure

Industry commentary notes SAP Build entered a crowded market, and many SAP customers already use Microsoft Power Platform or Mendix—indicating SAP Build generally competes for adoption within existing SAP accounts rather than displacing entrenched low-code platforms.

	SAP Build	Microsoft Power Platform	Mendix
Starting Price	SAP publishes per-user and per-developer pricing; additional runtime/capacity charges apply and published pricing should be validated with the vendor	Multiple SKUs across Power Apps and Power Automate; published per-app and per-user pricing examples are provided in Microsoft's licensing documentation and should be validated for your scenario	Free tier plus paid tiers; published monthly pricing varies by plan, capacity, and features and should be validated with the vendor
Primary Use Case	SAP-centric enterprises extending S/4HANA and SAP apps with governance/clean-core	Microsoft-heavy environments (M365/Azure) needing broad low-code + automation + connectors	Enterprise low-code app development, including cross-system apps; platform maturity outside SAP ecosystem
Key Strength	SAP-native integration + SAP governance narrative + suite scope (apps + automation + workspace)	Breadth of adoption, ecosystem, integration with M365/Azure, mature citizen-dev motion	Mature LCAP with strong app lifecycle features; widely used outside SAP ecosystem
Key Weakness	Complexity beyond templates; non-SAP integration friction; licensing/TCO sprawl risk	Licensing complexity and request limits/overages; governance can still be challenging at scale	Can require meaningful platform expertise; enterprise pricing can rise quickly for mission-critical/scale