Softwr

Automation Integration · head to head

Flowable vs Soketi

Flowable logo

Flowable

Automation Integration

Apache 2.0 BPMN, CMMN and DMN engine from the team that originally built Activiti

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Soketi logo

Soketi

Developer Tools

Self-hosted, Pusher-compatible WebSockets server with a stalled maintenance record

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Flowable the open source engine is genuinely usable but ships without the modelling studio, work application and admin console, so an open source deployment means building your own user interfaces before anyone can use it.; Soketi maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.
  • They diverge on capability: Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Flowable and Soketi actually diverge.

Attributes where Flowable and Soketi differ
AttributeFlowableSoketi
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsLinux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudLinux, macOS, Windows
CategoryAutomation IntegrationDeveloper Tools

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 Flowable

  • BPMN 2.0 engine
  • CMMN case management
  • DMN decision tables
  • Spring Boot integration
  • Modelling studio
  • Task and case application
  • REST APIs
  • History and audit

Only in Soketi

  • Pusher protocol compatibility
  • Presence and private channels
  • Horizontal scaling
  • App management backends
  • Webhooks
  • Prometheus metrics

What people use each for

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

Flowable

  • An insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and BPMN alone cannot express itnot Soketi
  • A bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing Spring Boot estate rather than buying a separate platformnot Soketi
  • A team leaving Activiti or jBPM that wants the same API family with active commercial maintenancenot Soketi
  • A regulated organisation needing complete process history and decision table audit trails for supervisorsnot Soketi

Soketi

  • A Laravel application that already uses Echo and wants to stop paying a hosted realtime providernot Flowable
  • Realtime notifications or presence indicators where data must not leave your own infrastructure for compliance reasonsnot Flowable
  • A local or CI environment that needs a Pusher-compatible server without hitting a paid accountnot Flowable
  • A high-connection-count application where hosted per-connection pricing has become the largest line in the infrastructure billnot Flowable

Where each one falls short

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

Flowable

  • The open source engine is genuinely usable but ships without the modelling studio, work application and admin console, so an open source deployment means building your own user interfaces before anyone can use it.
  • It expects Java engineering capacity; teams looking for a business-user low-code automation tool will find the modelling and deployment cycle far too technical.
  • Enterprise pricing is not published and is quoted per deployment, leaving buyers without a benchmark against Camunda or IBM alternatives.
  • The Activiti fork left three engines with related APIs and overlapping documentation in circulation, and search results routinely return advice for the wrong one.
  • Flowable AG is a small Swiss company relative to its competitors, so the partner network, training market and pool of engineers with production experience are all limited outside Europe.

Soketi

  • Maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.
  • Dependency drift on Node and uWebSockets.js will eventually force you to fork or migrate, and that cost is unbudgeted at the point you adopt it.
  • There is no commercial support to buy, so a production incident at three in the morning is entirely your problem with no escalation path.
  • Scaling beyond a single node needs Redis and careful configuration, and getting presence channels correct across nodes is a genuine source of subtle bugs.
  • It implements the Pusher protocol rather than tracking it, so any protocol feature Pusher adds later will not appear, and the compatibility guarantee slowly decays.

Pricing, plan by plan

Flowable

Free
  • Flowable Open SourceFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines
    • Embeddable Java library or standalone apps
    • No modelling studio or enterprise applications
  • Flowable Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Modelling studio, work application and admin console
    • Connectors, forms and advanced identity management
    • Support with SLA and version maintenance

Soketi

Free
  • SoketiFree
    • MIT licensed
    • Unlimited connections subject to your own hardware
    • No vendor billing

Which should you pick?

Choose Flowable if

  • You need bpmn 2.0 engine.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want cmmn case management.
Flowable review

Choose Soketi if

  • You need pusher protocol compatibility.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows.
  • You also want presence and private channels.
Soketi review

Questions people ask

Is Flowable or Soketi better?
Neither clearly leads. Flowable starts at Free and Soketi at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Flowable or Soketi?
Flowable starts at Free and Soketi at Free.
Does Flowable or Soketi run on more platforms?
Flowable runs on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. Soketi runs on Linux, macOS, Windows.
Can I use Flowable for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Flowable best used for?
Flowable is most often used for an insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and bpmn alone cannot express it, a bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing spring boot estate rather than buying a separate platform, a team leaving activiti or jbpm that wants the same api family with active commercial maintenance, a regulated organisation needing complete process history and decision table audit trails for supervisors. Of those, an insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and bpmn alone cannot express it and a bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing spring boot estate rather than buying a separate platform are not what Soketi is typically brought in for.
What can Flowable do that Soketi cannot?
Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, CMMN case management, DMN decision tables, Spring Boot integration. Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility, Presence and private channels, Horizontal scaling, App management backends.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Flowable: Is Flowable open source?

Yes, the BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines are Apache 2.0. The modelling studio and enterprise applications are commercial.

Soketi: Is Soketi still maintained?

Barely. The maintainer has stated that available time is very limited and releases have been sparse; treat it as community-maintained.

Flowable: How does it relate to Activiti and jBPM?

The same core developers built jBPM, then Activiti, then forked Activiti in 2016 to create Flowable.

Soketi: Do I need to change my client code?

No. Pusher client SDKs and Laravel Echo work by changing the host, port and credentials.

Flowable: What does Flowable Enterprise cost?

Nothing is published. It is quoted per deployment by the vendor.

Soketi: What does it cost?

Nothing in licence fees. It is MIT licensed; you pay for the server it runs on.

Flowable: Why choose it over Camunda?

CMMN case management is a first-class engine, which matters when work is exception-driven rather than a fixed sequence.

Soketi: What are people moving to?

Laravel Reverb for Laravel applications, and Sockudo, a Rust reimplementation, for others.

Share

Related pages

More on Flowable

More on Soketi

Keep looking

Other head to heads