Appian vs Pega
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
Appian is the stronger AI pick in Low-Code & No-Code: it has a visibility score of 19.6 versus 2 for Pega, and ranks ahead in 100% of the answers that name both.
Choose Appian if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (19.6 vs 2)
- AI answers describe it more positively (38% vs 20% positive)
- You need SOC 1 or SOC 2 or SOC 3 or FedRAMP Moderate or FedRAMP High or DISA IL5 provisional authorization coverage
- heavy-duty workflow automation and process orchestration
Choose Pega if…
- You need SOC 1 Type II or SOC 2 Type II or ISO 42001 or ISO 22301:2019 or ISO 9001 or CSA or Cyber Essentials or Cyber Essentials Plus or HITRUST or GDPR or FedRAMP or IRAP coverage
- You prefer a larger, established vendor (5,000+ employees)
- Strong fit for workflow automation, RPA, case management, and decisioning
- Named among leading low-code vendors in analyst evaluations
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 3
| Metric | Appian | Pega |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 19.6% | 2% |
| Change vs last week | down−1% | down−0.9% |
| Rank in Low-Code & No-Code | #6 | #34 |
| Share of voice | 5.4% | 0.9% |
| Mentions this run | 31 | 6 |
| Positive in AI answers | 38% | 20% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Appian −1pp · Pega −0.6000000000000001pp over 1 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Appian leads on 3 of 3 engines
Head to head in AI answers
6 engine answers name both brands
| Prompt | Engine | Appian | Pega |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best low-code platform for enterprise | ChatGPT | #4 | #8 |
| Compare the leading Low-Code & No-Code platforms | ChatGPT | #4 | #8 |
| Which Low-Code & No-Code vendors do analysts recommend? | ChatGPT | #4 | #7 |
| Which Low-Code & No-Code vendors do analysts recommend? | Perplexity | #4 | #10 |
| Official website of the top low-code platform vendors | ChatGPT | #4 | #7 |
| Official website of the top low-code platform vendors | Perplexity | #4 | #7 |
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Appian | Pega |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per seat | — |
| Entry price | Contact sales | — |
| Free plan | Yes | — |
| Deployment | Appian Cloud, with a separate Government Cloud for federal customers, plus self-managed and hybrid options | Cloud (Pega Cloud, fully managed SaaS) |
| Integrations | — | 200+ |
| Compliance | SOC 1, SOC 2, SOC 3, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI DSS, FedRAMP Moderate, FedRAMP High, DISA IL5 provisional authorization | SOC 1 Type II, SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, ISO 22301:2019, ISO 9001, CSA, PCI DSS, Cyber Essentials, Cyber Essentials Plus, HITRUST, GDPR, FedRAMP, HIPAA, IRAP |
| Support | Appian Customer Success program, Appian Guarantee for first app delivery in 8 weeks or less | — |
| Founded | 1999 | 1983 |
| Headquarters | McLean, Virginia | Waltham, Massachusetts, United States |
| Employees | 1,001–5,000 | 5,000+ |
| Funding | IPO on Nasdaq (APPN) at $12 per share · $85M raised | IPO |
| Best for | Large enterprises and government bodies running complex, document-intensive, high-volume processes that depend on operational context | Large enterprises in regulated industries that need governed workflow automation and decisioning |
Plans side by side
Appian
Pega
Pricing not available.
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Appian
- heavy-duty workflow automation and process orchestration
- strong case management
- suited to regulated industries
- governed platform for AI agents
- free Community Edition for evaluation
- quote-based, less transparent pricing
Pega
- Strong fit for workflow automation, RPA, case management, and decisioning
- Named among leading low-code vendors in analyst evaluations
- Recognised as a major enterprise CRM suite provider
- AI-powered decisioning and workflow tools
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 98.8%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “Appian vs Pega”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/appian-vs-pega, data of Nov 3, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.