Rapid Application Development Software

 
for Rapid Application Development
G2 watermark
Grid℠ Scoring
Contenders
Leaders
High Performers
Niche
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Market Presence
Satisfaction
Sort by:
# of Ratings
Satisfaction
Market Presence
G2 Score
 

Rapid Application Development Software Definition

Rapid application development (RAD) software provides programmers and developers with the tools necessary to build an application quickly from start to finish. Rapid application development refers to a method that development teams use to build new applications quickly and with an emphasis on releasing frequent prototypes. This model allows for high business involvement by focusing less on planning, and more on releasing a working prototype which garners reactions and critiques from users. With RAD software, development teams can be flexible in the development lifecycle, with applications evolving over time with input from business involvement and user reaction from previous models.

For related software, see our integrated development environment (IDE) software category.

Rapid Application Development Grid℠ Description

Products shown on the Grid℠ for Rapid Application Development have received a minimum of 10 reviews/ratings in data gathered by August 29, 2016. Products are ranked by customer satisfaction (based on user reviews) and market presence (based on market share, vendor size, and social impact) and placed into four categories on the Grid℠:
  • Leaders offer rapid application development products that are rated highly by G2 Crowd users and have substantial scale, market share, and global support and service resources. Leaders include: FileMaker, QuickBase, Nintex Workflow Platform, Spring Boot, and Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
  • High Performers provide products that are highly rated by their users, but have not yet achieved the market share and scale of the vendors in the Leader category. High Performers include: django and OutSystems Platform
  • Contenders have significant Market Presence and resources, but their products have received below average user Satisfaction ratings or have not yet received a sufficient number of reviews to validate their products. Contenders include: ColdFusion
  • Niche products do not have the Market Presence of the Leaders. They may have been rated positively on customer Satisfaction, but have not yet received enough reviews to validate their success. Niche products include: Angular.io

New Products on Grid℠

Products appearing on the Rapid Application Development Grid℠ for the first time are Nintex Workflow Platform, Outsystems Platform, and Angular.io.

Products Not Yet on Grid℠

Products with fewer than 10 reviews are not included on the Grid℠. Some notable products not yet included are K2 Blackpearl, PowerApps, and Zoho Creator. Users of these products are encouraged to visit the Rapid Application Development category and write a review.



 

Grid℠ Scores for Rapid Application Development

 
The table below shows the Satisfaction and Market Presence scores that determine vendor placement on the Grid℠. To learn more about each of the products, please see the executive profile section.

Leaders

# of Reviews Satisfaction (normalized) Market Presence G2 Score
FileMaker
31
80
70
75
QuickBase
62
92
54
73
Nintex Workflow Platform
52
76
54
65
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
13
58
56
57
Spring Boot
22
62
52
57

High Performers

# of Reviews Satisfaction (normalized) Market Presence G2 Score
django
44
82
40
61
OutSystems Platform
17
68
48
58

Contenders

# of Reviews Satisfaction (normalized) Market Presence G2 Score
ColdFusion
21
5
55
30

Niche

# of Reviews Satisfaction (normalized) Market Presence G2 Score
Angular.io
15
12
28
20

 

Grid℠ Methodology

 

Grid℠ Rating Methodology

The Grid℠ represents the democratic voice of real software users, rather than the subjective opinion of one analyst. G2 Crowd rates rapid application development products algorithmically based on data sourced from product reviews shared by G2 Crowd users and data aggregated from online sources and social networks.

Technology buyers can use the Grid℠ to help them quickly select the best rapid application development product for their business and to find peers with similar experiences. For vendors, media, investors, and analysts, the Grid℠ provides benchmarks for product comparison and market trend analysis.

Grid℠ Scoring Methodology

G2 Crowd rates products and vendors based on reviews gathered from our user community, as well as data aggregated from online sources and social networks. We apply a unique, patent-pending algorithm to this data to calculate the product strength and scores in real time. The Summer 2016 Rapid Application Development Grid℠ report is based off of scores calculated using the G2 Crowd algorithm v2.0 from reviews collected through August 29, 2016. To view the Rapid Application Development Grid℠ with the most recent data, please visit the Rapid Application Development page.

The Satisfaction rating is affected by the following (in order of importance):

  • Customer satisfaction with end user-focused product attributes based on user reviews
  • Popularity and statistical significance based on the number of reviews received by G2 Crowd
  • Customers' satisfaction with administration-specific product attributes based on user reviews
  • Overall customer satisfaction and Net Promoter Score® (NPS) based on ratings by G2 Crowd users

The Market Presence score is affected by the following (in order of importance):

  • Product market presence
    • Number of employees for product (based on social networks and public sources)
    • Number of product reviews
    • Product social impact based on factors including Twitter followers and domain authority
  • Vendor market presence
    • Number of employees for parent company (based on social networks and public resources)
    • Vendor momentum based on web traffic and search trends
    • Vendor social impact based on Klout score and Twitter followers
    • Age of company (number of years in operation)
    • Employee satisfaction and engagement (based on social network ratings)

Grid℠ Categorization Methodology

Making G2 Crowd research relevant and easy for people to use as they evaluate and select business software products is one of our most important goals. In support of that goal, organizing products and software companies in a well-defined structure that makes capturing, evaluating, and displaying reviews and other research in an orderly manner is a critical part of the research process.

To manage the process of categorizing the software products and the related reviews in the G2 community, G2 Crowd follows a publicly available categorization methodology. All rapid application development products appearing on the Grid℠ have passed through G2 Crowd's categorization methodology and meet G2 Crowd's category standards.

Many terms that appear regularly across G2 Crowd and are used to aid in product categorization warrant a definition to facilitate buyer understanding. These terms may be included within reviews from the G2 community or in executive summaries for products included on the Grid℠. A list of standard definitions is available to G2 Crowd users to eliminate confusion and ease the buying process.

Rating Changes and Dynamics

The ratings in this report are based on a snapshot of the user reviews and social data collected by G2 Crowd up through August 29, 2016. The ratings may change as the products are further developed, the vendors grow, and as additional opinions are shared by users. G2 Crowd updates the ratings on its website in real time as additional data is received, and this report will be updated as significant data is received. By improving their products and support and/or by having more satisfied customer voices heard, Contenders may become Leaders and Niche vendors may become High Performers.

Trust

Keeping our ratings unbiased is our top priority. We require the use of a LinkedIn account to validate a G2 Crowd user’s identity and employer. Additionally, we verify all reviews manually. We do not allow users to rate their employer’s products or those of their employer’s competitors. Though we share reviews from business partners (they often contain valuable content), we filter out business partner ratings in our aggregate ratings to avoid bias.

Our G2 Crowd staff does not add any subjective input to the ratings, which are determined algorithmically based on data aggregated from publicly available online sources and social networks. Vendors cannot influence their ratings by spending time or money with us. Only the opinion of real users and data from public sources factor into the ratings.

Grid℠ Inclusion Criteria

All products in a G2 Crowd category that have at least 10 reviews from real users of the product are included on the Grid℠. Inviting other users, such as colleagues and peers, to join G2 Crowd and share authentic product reviews will accelerate this process.

If an rapid application development product is not yet listed on G2 Crowd and it fits the market definition above, then users are encouraged to suggest its addition to our Rapid Application Development category.

Product Profiles

Product profiles and detailed charts are included for products with 10 or more reviews.
 

*Net Promoter, Net Promoter System, Net Promoter Score, NPS and the NPS-related emoticons are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Inc., Fred Reichheld and Satmetrix Systems, Inc.


 
FileMaker
FileMaker
31 ratings
4.8 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL)
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Founded: 1976
  • 2015 Revenue: $234,000.0 MM
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 117k
  • Website: www.apple.com

Product Synopsis

 

FileMaker has been named a Leader based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score and having a large Market Presence. FileMaker has the largest Market Presence among Rapid Application Development products. 94% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 90% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend FileMaker at a rate of 96%. FileMaker is also in the Desktop Database category.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
87%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
91%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
91%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
90%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
91%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
91%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
QuickBase
QuickBase
71 ratings
4.5 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Quickbase
  • Location: Cambridge, MA
  • Founded: 1999
  • 2016 Revenue: n/a (private company)
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 211
  • Website: quickbase.com

Product Synopsis

 

QuickBase has been named a Leader based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score and having a large Market Presence. QuickBase received the highest Satisfaction score among Rapid Application Development products. 94% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 95% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend QuickBase at a rate of 89%.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
92%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
92%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
89%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
92%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
93%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
90%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
Nintex Workflow Platform
Nintex Workflow Platform
52 ratings
4.6 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Nintex
  • Location: Bellevue, WA
  • Founded: 2006
  • 2016 Revenue: n/a (private company)
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 400
  • Website: www.nintex.com

Product Synopsis

 

Nintex Workflow Platform has been named a Leader based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score and having a large Market Presence. 96% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 92% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Nintex Workflow Platform at a rate of 91%. Nintex Workflow Platform is also in the Business Process Management category.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
76%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
88%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
85%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
88%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
83%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
88%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
13 ratings
4.5 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Salesforce (NYSE: CRM)
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Founded: 1999
  • 2016 Revenue: $6,667.2 MM
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 22.9k
  • Website: www.salesforce.com

Product Synopsis

 

Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com has been named a Leader based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score and having a large Market Presence. 92% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 100% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com at a rate of 91%. Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com is also in the Drag and Drop App Development and Platform as a Service (PaaS) categories.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
86%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
88%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
89%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
95%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
95%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
93%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
Spring Boot
Spring Boot
22 ratings
4.5 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Pivotal Software
  • Location: Palo Alto, CA
  • Founded: 2012
  • 2016 Revenue: n/a (private company)
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 1.63k
  • Website: www.pivotal.io

Product Synopsis

 

Spring Boot has been named a Leader based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score and having a large Market Presence. 100% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 95% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Spring Boot at a rate of 91%.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
81%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
84%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
90%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
90%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
94%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
90%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
django
django
44 ratings
4.6 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Django
  • Location: Lawrence, KS
  • Founded: 2005
  • 2016 Revenue: n/a (private company)
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 1
  • Website: www.djangoproject.com

Product Synopsis

 

django has been named a High Performer based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score and having a small Market Presence. 98% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 93% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend django at a rate of 91%. django is also in the Python Web Frameworks and Application Server categories.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
83%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
89%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
93%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
89%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
88%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
81%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
OutSystems Platform
OutSystems Platform
17 ratings
4.7 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: OutSystems
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Founded: 2001
  • 2016 Revenue: n/a (private company)
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 507
  • Website: www.outsystems.com

Product Synopsis

 

OutSystems Platform has been named a High Performer based on receiving a high customer Satisfaction score and having a small Market Presence. 100% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 100% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend OutSystems Platform at a rate of 95%.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
88%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
92%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
88%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
86%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
94%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
88%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
ColdFusion
ColdFusion
21 ratings
3.4 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Adobe (NASDAQ: ADBE)
  • Location: San Jose, CA
  • Founded: 1982
  • 2015 Revenue: $4,795.5 MM
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 16.2k
  • Website: www.adobe.com

Product Synopsis

 

ColdFusion has been named a Contender based on receiving a relatively low customer Satisfaction score and having a large Market Presence. 67% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 38% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend ColdFusion at a rate of 67%. ColdFusion is also in the Software Testing and Integrated Development Environment (IDE) categories.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
65%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
80%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
73%
Average 87%
 
Ease of Admin
81%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Doing Business With
71%
Average 89%
 
Ease of Setup
78%
Average 87%

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 
Angular.io
Angular.io
15 ratings
4.1 out of 5 stars
 

Vendor Information

 
  • Vendor: Angular
  • Location: Menlo Park, CA
  • Founded: 2014
  • 2016 Revenue: n/a (private company)
  • Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 2
  • Website: www.angular.io

Product Synopsis

 

Angular.io has been named a Niche vendor based on receiving a relatively low customer Satisfaction score and having a small Market Presence. 100% of users rated it 4 or 5 stars, 93% of users believe it is headed in the right direction, and users said they would be likely to recommend Angular.io at a rate of 82%.

Satisfaction Ratings

 
 
Quality of Support
79%
Average 82%
 
Ease of Use
71%
Average 86%
 
Meets Requirements
87%
Average 87%
 
Not enough data available for Ease of Admin
 
Not enough data available for Ease of Doing Business With
 
Not enough data available for Ease of Setup

Top Industries Represented

 

Review Breakdown

 
 
 

Satisfaction Ratings

 
G2 Crowd users rated rapid application development software vendors' ability to satisfy their needs as shown in the table below.
FileMaker
QuickBase
Nintex Workflow Platform
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Spring Boot
django
OutSystems Platform
ColdFusion
Angular.io
Average
Satisfaction
Likely to Recommend
96%
89%
91%
91%
91%
91%
95%
67%
82%
88%
Product Going in Right Direction?
90%
95%
92%
100%
95%
93%
100%
38%
93%
89%

Satisfaction by Category

Meets Requirements
91%
89%
85%
89%
90%
93%
88%
73%
87%
87%
Ease of Admin
90%
92%
88%
95%
90%
89%
86%
81%
n/a
89%
Ease of Doing Business
91%
93%
83%
95%
94%
88%
94%
71%
n/a
89%
Quality of Support
87%
92%
76%
86%
81%
83%
88%
65%
79%
82%
Ease of Setup
91%
90%
88%
93%
90%
81%
88%
78%
n/a
87%
Ease of Use
91%
92%
88%
88%
84%
89%
92%
80%
71%
86%
FileMaker
QuickBase
Nintex Workflow Platform
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Spring Boot
django
OutSystems Platform
ColdFusion
Angular.io
Average
Net Promoter Score (NPS)
Net Promoter Score (NPS) (Range from -100 to +100)
84
68
69
69
68
70
82
-5
33
60

*n/a is displayed when fewer than five responses were received for the question.


 

Additional Data

Additional product data on customer segments, deployment and implementation, user adoption and ROI, and market presence is displayed below.

Customer Segments Served

FileMaker
QuickBase
Nintex Workflow Platform
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Spring Boot
django
OutSystems Platform
ColdFusion
Angular.io
Average
Customers by Size
Small Business (50 or fewer emp.) 74% 28% 10% 54% 14% 57% 18% 33% 47% 37%
Mid-Market (51-1000 emp.) 13% 45% 34% 23% 45% 18% 41% 33% 33% 31%
Enterprise ( >1000 emp.) 13% 27% 56% 23% 41% 25% 41% 33% 20% 30%
FileMaker
QuickBase
Nintex Workflow Platform
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Spring Boot
django
OutSystems Platform
ColdFusion
Angular.io
Deployment Method
Cloud
40%
83%
17%
n/a
50%
80%
67%
44%
n/a
On-Premise
60%
17%
83%
n/a
50%
20%
33%
56%
n/a

Implementation Time

Avg. Months to Go Live
1.9
1.4
1.6
n/a
2.8
0.7
5.6
1.8
n/a

Implementation Method

Led by In-House Team
100%
94%
83%
60%
100%
93%
100%
83%
n/a
Led by Vendor PS
0%
0%
10%
20%
0%
7%
0%
0%
n/a
Led by 3rd Party
0%
6%
7%
20%
0%
0%
0%
17%
n/a

Number of Users Purchased

Median Number of Users Bought
27
75
375
n/a
n/a
5
n/a
n/a
n/a

Contract Term

Avg. Contract Term (Months)
14
7
15
n/a
n/a
2
n/a
n/a
n/a
FileMaker
QuickBase
Nintex Workflow Platform
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Spring Boot
django
OutSystems Platform
ColdFusion
Angular.io
Average
User Adoption
Average User Adoption
88%
78%
62%
n/a
48%
82%
n/a
n/a
n/a
72
FileMaker
QuickBase
Nintex Workflow Platform
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Spring Boot
django
OutSystems Platform
ColdFusion
Angular.io
Average
Payback Period
Avg. Payback Period (Months)
3
8
15
n/a
n/a
3
n/a
n/a
n/a
7
FileMaker
QuickBase
Nintex Workflow Platform
Salesforce App Cloud: Force.com
Spring Boot
django
OutSystems Platform
ColdFusion
Angular.io
Vendor Information
Vendor Name
Apple
Quickbase
Nintex
Salesforce
Pivotal Software
Django
OutSystems
Adobe
Angular
Year Founded
1976
1999
2006
1999
2012
2005
2001
1982
2014
Revenue ($MM)
$234,000
n/a
n/a
$6,667
n/a
n/a
n/a
$4,796
n/a
Employees on LinkedIn (Vendor)
117,171
211
400
22,919
1,633
1
507
16,166
2
LinkedIn Followers
3,058,581
2,228
11,707
660,708
40,176
145
20,053
592,231
160
Twitter Followers (Vendor)
Twitter Followers (Product)
4,626
4,874
6,251
304,699
10,993
50,556
3,672
10,356
165,625
Klout Score (Vendor)
50.0
n/a
57.0
87.0
70.0
57.0
54.0
89.0
64.0
Klout Score (Product)
33.0
55.0
58.0
62.0
56.0
59.0
52.0
48.0
46.0
Glassdoor Rating
4.0
4.0
3.7
4.1
3.9
n/a
4.5
4.1
n/a
Alexa Web Traffic Rank
54
7,766
100,559
128
30,423
6,057
63,517
104
18,696,096
 

*n/a is displayed when fewer than five responses were received for the question or when data is not publicly available.


© 2016 G2 Crowd, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form without G2 Crowd’s prior written permission. While the information in this report has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, G2 Crowd disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of such information and shall have no liability for errors, omissions, or inadequacies in such information.