comparison

Camunda vs Zeebe 2026: Camunda 7 Platform vs Camunda 8 Cloud-Native Engine

Zeebe is the cloud-native BPMN workflow engine that powers Camunda 8, while Camunda 7 is the mature JVM-based platform that preceded it. Both are maintained by Camunda Services GmbH. This 2026 comparison clarifies the architecture differences, feature deltas, migration considerations, and pricing between the two generations.

Overview

Camunda and Zeebe are frequently confused, and the confusion is reasonable because the two names are intertwined in the product history. Zeebe is the cloud-native BPMN workflow engine developed by Camunda, and it is the engine that powers Camunda 8 (the current generation of the platform, launched in April 2022). Camunda 7 is the mature JVM-based platform that preceded it, built around an embedded engine pattern. Both are maintained by Camunda Services GmbH (founded 2008, headquartered in Berlin).

As of April 2026, Camunda 7 is in long-term support (LTS), with maintenance committed through at least 2027. Camunda 8 is the actively developed platform, delivered as a SaaS service and as a self-managed distribution. Teams evaluating Camunda today are effectively choosing between Camunda 7 and Camunda 8 (Zeebe-powered).

Summary Table

Feature Camunda 7 Camunda 8 (Zeebe)
Engine architecture Embedded JVM engine, relational database Distributed gRPC-based engine (Zeebe), event-sourced log
Deployment model Embedded in Spring Boot or standalone server Self-managed Kubernetes or Camunda 8 SaaS
Primary language Java Language-agnostic (gRPC clients in Java, Node.js, C#, Go, Python)
BPMN engine Native BPMN 2.0 Native BPMN 2.0 (subset plus cloud-native extensions)
State persistence JDBC-connected relational DB (PostgreSQL, Oracle, MySQL) Event log in RocksDB, replicated via Raft
Scaling model Vertical scaling, clustered via shared database Horizontal scaling via partition rebalancing
Operator UX Cockpit Operate, Tasklist, Optimize (separate web applications)
Process modeler Camunda Modeler (desktop) Camunda Modeler and Web Modeler (SaaS)
Community edition Free, open source (Apache 2.0) Zeebe is source-available (Camunda Platform License); SaaS has free Starter tier
Enterprise pricing Commercial contract, typical six-figure enterprise Camunda 8 Starter ~$10K/year; self-managed from ~$49K/year; scales by process instances
Latest release Camunda 7.22 (LTS, April 2026) Camunda 8.6 (April 2026)

Architecture Differences

Camunda 7: Embedded Engine

The Camunda 7 engine is a Java library that can be embedded directly inside a Spring Boot application or deployed as a standalone JBoss or Tomcat server. Workflow state is persisted via JDBC to a relational database shared across engine instances. Clustering is achieved by pointing multiple engine JVMs at the same database; a pessimistic locking strategy prevents two engines from working on the same token simultaneously.

Advantages of the embedded model:

  • Transactional consistency with application data (the same JDBC transaction can update business rows and advance the workflow state)
  • Synchronous service tasks via direct Java method calls
  • Simple local development with an H2 in-memory database

Constraints:

  • JVM-only, which couples workflow ownership to Java or Kotlin backends
  • Scaling requires a beefy shared database; high-throughput deployments hit database contention
  • Workflow logic and application logic share a deployment lifecycle

Camunda 8: Zeebe Distributed Engine

Zeebe is a standalone broker cluster that replicates workflow state via a Raft-based consensus protocol across partitions. Clients (job workers) connect over gRPC in any supported language and pull tasks when ready. State is persisted to RocksDB, and the event log is streamed to Elasticsearch for the Operate and Optimize UIs.

Advantages of Zeebe:

  • Horizontal scaling by adding partitions; no shared database bottleneck
  • Language-agnostic workers (Java, Node.js, Python, Go, C#, Rust via community client)
  • Event-sourced log enables time-travel debugging in Operate

Trade-offs:

  • Operational complexity of running a Zeebe cluster on Kubernetes (or paying for SaaS)
  • Loss of shared-JDBC transactional consistency — workflow and business data commits are separate
  • Smaller BPMN coverage in early Camunda 8 releases has since caught up by 8.6, but a handful of advanced Camunda 7 patterns still require redesign

Feature Deltas

Most standard BPMN 2.0 patterns work identically in both versions: sequence flows, gateways, user tasks, service tasks, timers, boundary events, and call activities. Key differences as of April 2026:

  • DMN (Decision Model and Notation): Both engines support DMN. Camunda 7 uses FEEL and JUEL; Camunda 8 uses FEEL exclusively.
  • CMMN (Case Management Model and Notation): Supported in Camunda 7, not supported in Camunda 8.
  • Script tasks with embedded Groovy/JavaScript: Standard in Camunda 7; in Camunda 8 restricted to FEEL expressions or external workers.
  • Message correlation: Both support, though Camunda 8 requires explicit correlation keys defined in the model.
  • Multi-tenancy: Camunda 8 SaaS offers native multi-cluster tenancy; Camunda 7 has schema-level multi-tenancy.

Migration Considerations

Teams on Camunda 7 considering migration to Camunda 8 should evaluate:

  • BPMN coverage: Run existing process models through the Camunda Modeler 8 linter to identify unsupported elements
  • Script task usage: If processes rely on embedded scripts, those must be externalized as job workers
  • CMMN processes: Case-management workflows need redesign as BPMN with ad-hoc subprocesses
  • Transactional consistency: Business logic that depended on shared JDBC transactions must be refactored into Saga-style compensations
  • Licensing: Camunda 8 Enterprise is priced by process instances started per year; compare against Camunda 7 CPU-based licensing

Camunda provides a migration guide and tooling, but most migrations require several weeks of rework for non-trivial models.

When to Stay on Camunda 7

  • Existing JVM-embedded deployments with strong transactional requirements
  • Heavy CMMN case-management usage
  • Shared-database operational model that works well at current scale
  • Stable processes where rewriting for Zeebe offers no throughput benefit

When to Move to Camunda 8

  • Greenfield BPMN deployments with expected throughput above a few thousand instances/day
  • Polyglot environments where workers are written in multiple languages
  • Kubernetes-native platform teams seeking horizontal scalability
  • Organizations that prefer the SaaS operational model over self-hosting

Pricing Summary

Camunda 7 Community is free under the Apache 2.0 license. Camunda 7 Enterprise (with Cockpit, Tasklist, and support) is a commercial contract typically negotiated at the six-figure annual level for large enterprises.

Camunda 8 pricing as of April 2026:

  • Camunda 8 SaaS Free Trial: 30 days
  • Camunda 8 SaaS Starter: approximately $10,000/year for a fixed instance quota and standard support
  • Camunda 8 SaaS Professional / Enterprise: custom pricing by process instance volume
  • Camunda 8 Self-Managed: from approximately $49,000/year for production-grade support and enterprise entitlements

Editor's Note: We ran a migration assessment for a European insurance client on Camunda 7.18 in 2025. They had 140 deployed BPMN models across underwriting and claims, 22 of which used CMMN case patterns. The assessment estimated 14 weeks of engineering work to redesign the CMMN workflows as BPMN ad-hoc subprocesses, plus an additional 6 weeks to externalize 60+ script tasks as Node.js job workers. Annual license delta was +$38K for Camunda 8 Self-Managed. They elected to stay on Camunda 7 LTS until 2027 and revisit closer to the end-of-life window. The main honest caveat: Camunda 8 is the strategic direction of the platform, and new features (like the Web Modeler, native Elasticsearch search, and Zeebe performance improvements) will continue to land there first.

Written & reviewed by Rafal Fila · Last updated:

Tools Mentioned

Related Guides

comparison

Moxo vs Lindy in 2026: Who Presses Approve When the Agent Asks

Lindy, founded in 2023, sells an AI teammate that lives in Slack and in each person's inbox; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, runs multi-party processes where approvals are steps only a person can close. Moxo wins three rounds to two: who closes the step, work across companies and the record. Lindy wins reach and testing. Vendor pages and docs read 28 September 2026.

comparison

Moxo vs Kissflow in 2026: What an Outside Approver Costs, and What the Record Proves

Moxo and Kissflow both sell approvals to people who do not write code, and each wins one round outright: Moxo's Web and Headless SDKs run the approval inside the buyer's own product, under the buyer's own sign-in. Kissflow's portal audit log stamps every event with an actor, a device and an IP, where Moxo publishes no field list. Both answers are quoted, not priced, and both meters punish a one-step request sent to hundreds of clients. Cost, the decision record, rejection routes, AI metering and governance, verified 14 to 23 September 2026.

comparison

Moxo vs Camunda 8 in 2026: BPMN User Tasks for Staff, Step Types for Outsiders

Camunda 8 can fix a process under cases already running, since active instances migrate onto a corrected definition and, for Camunda user tasks, "a migrated active user task remains assigned to the same user". Moxo keeps the shared queue that Camunda's Tasklist V2 stops evaluating, with desks that are "a shared inbox that multiple users can pick work from". Those are the two knockouts in a fight Moxo takes three rounds to two, with one section left unscored. Portability, AI review gates and a published price decide the rest, verified 14 to 23 September 2026.

Related Rankings

Best Human-in-the-Loop Automation Platforms 2026

Eight platforms are ranked here on a single mechanism: how a person enters an automated path, and what the system can prove afterward about the decision they made. Moxo scores 7.7 and ranks first; Camunda 8 scores 7.2, Microsoft Power Automate 7.1, Pega 6.9, n8n 6.7, Zapier 5.9, Kissflow 5.8 and ServiceNow 4.8, scored 22 September 2026 on the five weighted criteria. Those criteria cover the step type, the approver's account or licence, the routes available on a rejection, the audit record, and the meter that charges for the decision, and none of them can tell a review from a rubber stamp, so the methodology adds a check readers can run on any product in a few minutes: whether the decision record tells a considered approval from an instant one. Every figure was read from a vendor-owned surface and carries its own date.

Best Automation Platforms for AI Orchestration 2026

This ranking answers one question: how many real business applications can an AI agent act on out of the box? It evaluates nine platforms as of August 2026 on the reach they give an agent, not on the workflow logic they can express. That boundary is deliberate, because two neighbouring pages on this site answer different questions. Best Process Orchestration Platforms 2026 scores multi-step process control, error handling and state management. Best AI Agent Platforms 2026 scores building and hosting the agent itself. This page scores the layer between them: the connective tissue that lets an agent already built elsewhere reach the applications a business actually runs on. A platform that leads one of those pages can place low here, and two of them do. Scores derive from application and action catalogue counts, the exposure model each platform uses to publish those catalogues to an agent, setup effort, failure handling and cost per agent action. Every figure was retrieved from a vendor-owned surface on 11 August 2026 unless an earlier date is stated against it.

Common Questions

Can you automate a platform with no API using Zapier?

Not as a proper Zapier app. Zapier's help centre, updated 29 May 2026, says a private app can be built "for any service with a public API", and its fallbacks for a missing app are email parsing, RSS, webhooks, asking Zapier to add the app, or using a different app. Those let a no-API platform tell a Zap that something happened; none of them lets a Zap act inside the platform. The Zapier Agents Chrome extension can "run actions" on a page open in your own browser (help article updated 27 April 2026), but that is hands-on help, not a reusable Zap step.

How does Moxo keep humans in control when AI agents run a workflow?

Moxo keeps people on the decisions by design: approvals and other human steps are ones its product page says "only a person can close", and AI agents can fill preparer, advisor or reviewer slots around them (both read 15 September 2026). The checks on AI output are opt-in, though. In synthetic AutomationAtlas tests that day, an AI extract step's "Human review" and "Supervisor Agent" switches were both off by default, and the builder accepted the same role as a form's submitter and its approver.

How much does Moxo cost in 2026?

Moxo's only published price is Team: $5,000 a year, billed annually with no monthly option, for 100 flows and $100 of AI a year with unlimited seats (moxo.com/pricing, 28 September 2026). Scale (500 flows and $500 of AI a year) and Enterprise are custom quotes. There is no free plan, no published overage rate and no stated trial length, and the dollar AI allowance has no published conversion to the credits Moxo's product logs.

What is Moxo?

Moxo AI (app.moxo.com) is a process orchestration platform from Moxo, formerly Moxtra, for work where several parties, approvals and documents meet. You build templates of human steps, AI steps and automations, each run is a Flow with its own data and status, and outsiders act through account-free Magic Links. Its only published price is Team, and the AI agents start on the custom-quoted Scale plan (moxo.com/pricing, 15 September 2026). It is not Moxo Classic, the older app.