Softwr

Automation Integration · head to head

Activiti vs Apache Pulsar

Activiti logo

Activiti

Automation Integration

Apache 2.0 BPMN engine under Hyland, from which Flowable and Camunda were forked

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Apache Pulsar logo

Apache Pulsar

Databases

Cloud-native messaging and streaming with separated storage

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Activiti the last stable release was 8.2.0 in January 2024, and while release candidate builds continue, a two-year gap between stable versions is a real risk signal for a production dependency.; Apache Pulsar more components than Kafka: brokers, BookKeeper and ZooKeeper each need operating
  • They diverge on capability: Activiti covers BPMN 2.0 engine, Apache Pulsar covers Separated storage.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Activiti and Apache Pulsar actually diverge.

Attributes where Activiti and Apache Pulsar differ
AttributeActivitiApache Pulsar
PlatformsLinux, Windows, Docker, KubernetesLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted
CategoryAutomation IntegrationDatabases

Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (Open source, no licence fee), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Activiti

  • BPMN 2.0 engine
  • Activiti Cloud
  • Modeler
  • Java and REST APIs
  • Pluggable persistence
  • Identity integration

Only in Apache Pulsar

  • Separated storage
  • Queuing and streaming
  • Built-in multi-tenancy
  • Geo-replication

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Activiti

  • An Alfresco or Hyland content services deployment where Activiti is already the embedded workflow enginenot Apache Pulsar
  • A Java application that needs to embed a BPMN engine as a library under a permissive licencenot Apache Pulsar
  • An organisation that has ruled out Camunda 8 on licence grounds and needs an Apache 2.0 alternativenot Apache Pulsar
  • Document-centric approval workflows where the process engine sits inside the content management stack rather than beside itnot Apache Pulsar

Apache Pulsar

  • Platforms needing both work queues and replayable streams without running two systemsnot Activiti
  • Multi-tenant messaging where isolation between teams is a requirementnot Activiti
  • Deployments where storage and traffic grow at genuinely different ratesnot Activiti

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Activiti

  • The last stable release was 8.2.0 in January 2024, and while release candidate builds continue, a two-year gap between stable versions is a real risk signal for a production dependency.
  • Both Camunda and Flowable forked away and took large parts of the contributor base with them, so the community, tutorials and third-party tooling around Activiti are much thinner than around either fork.
  • Commercial support is only realistically available by buying Hyland Alfresco subscriptions, so there is no way to pay for Activiti support on its own.
  • Activiti Cloud imposes a distributed architecture of several Spring Boot services plus Keycloak, which is heavy for teams who simply wanted an embeddable engine.
  • Documentation is dated and partly split between old Alfresco sites and Hyland Connect, and the transition between Activiti 6, 7 and 8 architectures makes much of the older material actively misleading.

Apache Pulsar

  • More components than Kafka: brokers, BookKeeper and ZooKeeper each need operating
  • Correspondingly harder to run well, and the expertise is rarer than Kafka expertise
  • A much smaller ecosystem of connectors, tooling and hiring pool than Kafka
  • The architectural advantages only pay off at a scale most deployments never reach

Pricing, plan by plan

Activiti

Free
  • ActivitiFree
    • Apache 2.0 licence
    • Embeddable Java library or Activiti Cloud services
    • No usage limits

Apache Pulsar

Free
  • Apache PulsarFree
    • Full functionality
    • No usage limits
    • Community support

Which should you pick?

Choose Activiti if

  • You need bpmn 2.0 engine.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes.
  • You also want activiti cloud.
Activiti review

Choose Apache Pulsar if

  • You need separated storage.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
  • You also want queuing and streaming.
Apache Pulsar review

Questions people ask

Is Activiti or Apache Pulsar better?
Neither clearly leads. Activiti starts at Free and Apache Pulsar at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Activiti or Apache Pulsar?
Activiti starts at Free and Apache Pulsar at Free.
Does Activiti or Apache Pulsar run on more platforms?
Activiti runs on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes. Apache Pulsar runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
Can I use Activiti for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Activiti best used for?
Activiti is most often used for an alfresco or hyland content services deployment where activiti is already the embedded workflow engine, a java application that needs to embed a bpmn engine as a library under a permissive licence, an organisation that has ruled out camunda 8 on licence grounds and needs an apache 2.0 alternative, document-centric approval workflows where the process engine sits inside the content management stack rather than beside it. Of those, an alfresco or hyland content services deployment where activiti is already the embedded workflow engine and a java application that needs to embed a bpmn engine as a library under a permissive licence are not what Apache Pulsar is typically brought in for.
What can Activiti do that Apache Pulsar cannot?
Activiti covers BPMN 2.0 engine, Activiti Cloud, Modeler, Java and REST APIs. Apache Pulsar covers Separated storage, Queuing and streaming, Built-in multi-tenancy, Geo-replication.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Activiti: Is Activiti still maintained?

Yes, Hyland continues to publish builds, but the last stable release was 8.2.0 in January 2024.

Apache Pulsar: Is Apache Pulsar free?

Yes, open source under the Apache Software Foundation.

Activiti: What is its relationship to Camunda and Flowable?

Both are forks of Activiti: Camunda in 2013 and Flowable in 2016, when core developers left Alfresco.

Apache Pulsar: Pulsar or Kafka?

Pulsar separates storage from compute and covers queuing and streaming in one system. Kafka has a far larger ecosystem and hiring pool. Most teams should have a specific reason before choosing Pulsar.

Activiti: What licence is it?

Apache 2.0, which distinguishes it from Camunda 8’s source-available licence.

Apache Pulsar: Why does separated storage matter?

Brokers hold no data, so adding or replacing one requires no rebalancing, and storage can grow without adding serving capacity.

Activiti: Should I choose Activiti for a new project?

Only if the Apache licence or an existing Alfresco deployment is decisive. Flowable and Camunda have far larger ecosystems.

Share

Related pages

More on Activiti

More on Apache Pulsar

Keep looking

Other head to heads