Softwr

Automation Integration · head to head

Activiti vs NocoDB

Activiti logo

Activiti

Automation Integration

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

From
Free
Rated
-
NocoDB logo

NocoDB

Spreadsheets

Open-source no-code database platform with REST and GraphQL APIs

From
Free
Rated
-

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.; NocoDB the free cloud tier is capped at 3 editor seats, 1,000 records and 1 GB of storage
  • They diverge on capability: Activiti covers BPMN 2.0 engine, NocoDB covers REST API.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Activiti and NocoDB actually diverge.

Attributes where Activiti and NocoDB differ
AttributeActivitiNocoDB
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feefreemium
PlatformsLinux, Windows, Docker, KubernetesCloud, Self-hosted, Docker
CategoryAutomation IntegrationSpreadsheets
FoundedUnknown2020

Identical on both: starting price (Free), 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 NocoDB

  • REST API
  • GraphQL API
  • No-code database
  • Multiple SQL databases
  • Webhooks
  • Automation
  • Cloud support
  • Self-hosted support

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 NocoDB
  • A Java application that needs to embed a BPMN engine as a library under a permissive licencenot NocoDB
  • An organisation that has ruled out Camunda 8 on licence grounds and needs an Apache 2.0 alternativenot NocoDB
  • Document-centric approval workflows where the process engine sits inside the content management stack rather than beside itnot NocoDB

NocoDB

  • Self-hosting an open source alternative to a spreadsheet databasenot Activiti
  • Putting a spreadsheet interface over an existing Postgres or MySQL databasenot Activiti
  • Building internal tools on structured data with an APInot Activiti
  • Team bases with per-field and per-table permissions on the paid tiersnot 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.

NocoDB

  • The free cloud tier is capped at 3 editor seats, 1,000 records and 1 GB of storage
  • Records are the metering unit on cloud, so Plus covers 50K and Business 300K rather than scaling by seat alone
  • Row-level security, audit log retention and team hierarchy require the Scale tier
  • SCIM provisioning and air-gapped deployment are Enterprise only
  • The self-hosted Community edition is unlimited on records and seats but does without workflows, scripts and dashboards, which start at the paid self-hosted tiers

Pricing, plan by plan

Activiti

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

NocoDB

Free
  • Free (Cloud)Free
    • 3 editor seats
    • 10 commenter seats
    • 1 GB storage
  • Plus$12/month
    • Unlimited seats
    • 50,000 records
    • 20 GB storage
  • Business$24/month
    • Unlimited seats
    • 300,000 records
    • 100 GB storage
  • Scale$45/month
    • Minimum 3 seats required
    • 1,000,000 records
    • 150 GB storage

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.

Choose NocoDB if

  • You need rest api.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Cloud, Self-hosted, Docker.
  • You also want graphql api.

Questions people ask

Is Activiti or NocoDB better?
Neither clearly leads. Activiti starts at Free and NocoDB at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Activiti or NocoDB?
Activiti starts at Free and NocoDB at Free.
Does Activiti or NocoDB run on more platforms?
Activiti runs on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes. NocoDB runs on Cloud, Self-hosted, Docker.
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 NocoDB is typically brought in for.
What can Activiti do that NocoDB cannot?
Activiti covers BPMN 2.0 engine, Activiti Cloud, Modeler, Java and REST APIs. NocoDB covers REST API, GraphQL API, No-code database, Multiple SQL databases.

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.

NocoDB: Is NocoDB free?

Yes, NocoDB offers a free cloud plan with 3 editor seats, 1,000 records, 1 GB storage, and 1,000 API calls per month. A free self-hosted Community edition with unlimited records and seats is also available.

Source
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.

NocoDB: How much does NocoDB Plus cost?

NocoDB Plus costs $12 per seat per month (billed annually) or $15 per seat per month (monthly). For unlimited seats, it costs $108/month annually or $180/month monthly. Plus includes 50,000 records, 20 GB storage, and 100,000 API calls per month.

Source
Activiti: What licence is it?

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

NocoDB: What is the difference between NocoDB Plus and Business plans?

Plus ($12/seat annual) includes 50,000 records and 100,000 API calls per month. Business ($24/seat annual) includes 300,000 records, 1,000,000 API calls per month, external database connections, SAML SSO, and table/field permissions.

Source
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.

NocoDB: Can I self-host NocoDB for free?

Yes, NocoDB's Community edition is free for self-hosting. It includes unlimited records, storage, and seats, with all core features including webhooks and 6 view types.

Source
Share

Related pages

Other head to heads