Softwr

Automation Integration · head to head

Flowable vs VerneMQ

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
VerneMQ logo

VerneMQ

Databases

Erlang MQTT broker whose source is Apache 2.0 but whose official binaries need a paid subscription

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.; VerneMQ the official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • They diverge on capability: Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Flowable and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where Flowable and VerneMQ differ
AttributeFlowableVerneMQ
PlatformsLinux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudLinux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes
CategoryAutomation IntegrationDatabases

Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (quote), 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 VerneMQ

  • Erlang/OTP clustering
  • MQTT 5.0 support
  • Plugin system
  • Backpressure handling
  • Bridge support
  • Metrics export
  • MQTT over WebSockets
  • Pluggable auth backends

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 VerneMQ
  • A bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing Spring Boot estate rather than buying a separate platformnot VerneMQ
  • A team leaving Activiti or jBPM that wants the same API family with active commercial maintenancenot VerneMQ
  • A regulated organisation needing complete process history and decision table audit trails for supervisorsnot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

  • An industrial operator that wants an MQTT broker with predictable memory behaviour and no data integration features it will not usenot Flowable
  • A team building from source to stay strictly under Apache 2.0 terms with no vendor licence entanglementnot Flowable
  • A deployment needing custom authentication logic implemented as a plugin in Lua or over a webhooknot Flowable
  • An organisation that wants a broker maintained by a small European company rather than by a vendor that keeps changing licencesnot 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.

VerneMQ

  • The official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • Octavo Labs is a very small company, so support depth, response times and the bus factor on the codebase are materially thinner than at HiveMQ or EMQ.
  • There is no data integration or rule engine layer, so routing messages into a database means writing and operating your own consumer service.
  • Operating an Erlang cluster requires runtime knowledge that most teams do not have and will use for nothing else in their stack.
  • There is no vendor-managed cloud offering, so every deployment is self-operated with the infrastructure and on-call cost that implies.

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

VerneMQ

Free
  • Source buildFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed source from GitHub
    • Full clustering and plugin capability
    • You compile and package it yourself
  • Binary packages and Docker images$undefined/year
    • Covered by the VerneMQ EULA, not Apache 2.0
    • Yearly usage subscription expected for commercial use
    • Official builds and Docker images
  • Commercial support$undefined/year
    • Evaluation, customisation and operations assistance
    • Custom development
    • Long-term maintenance agreements

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 VerneMQ if

  • You need erlang/otp clustering.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
  • You also want mqtt 5.0 support.
VerneMQ review

Questions people ask

Is Flowable or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. Flowable starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Flowable or VerneMQ?
Flowable starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free.
Does Flowable or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
Flowable runs on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
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 VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can Flowable do that VerneMQ cannot?
Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, CMMN case management, DMN decision tables, Spring Boot integration. VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

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.

VerneMQ: Is VerneMQ free?

The source is Apache 2.0 and free. The official binary packages and Docker images are covered by a separate EULA that expects a yearly fee for commercial use.

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.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

Yes. Octavo Labs AG in Zurich continues to publish 2.x releases, most recently in 2026.

Flowable: What does Flowable Enterprise cost?

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

VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

No. Every deployment is self-hosted, with commercial support available from Octavo Labs.

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.

VerneMQ: How does it compare to EMQX?

Narrower in features and without a rule engine, but with a simpler licence story for source builds after EMQX moved to BSL.

Share

Related pages

More on Flowable

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads