We performed a comparison between Layer7 API Management and Microsoft Azure API Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"Almost all security features are available out-of-the-box and can be deployed rapidly."
"It is fairly stable for the Gateway side."
"The most valuable feature was the gateway because it has a good dashboard which shows all the hits, misses, and issues, how often you are viewing, what was the response time, etc. The gateway was very easy to deploy."
"API Enhanced Portal 4.1 looks very promising. API Gateway policy manager for writing policies is excellent. It is the best in the industry for policy writing."
"It can be scaled as we need. And it can be used in different regions. We have different data centers in the U.S. and Beijing. We use it on-premise, on-cloud, and it can be hosted and used at any place and scaled across the regions."
"Layer7 API Management's availability on an on-premises deployment model, actually decreases the production time if its users have any issues at the server level."
"As an organization grow, you can use CA API Management for authentication purposes through the CA API Gateway. It allows for multiple identity providers with different Active Directories."
"This improved our organization, because it gives the management data to discuss for the next course of action and it suggests what to work on, as the next thing."
"The solution is reliable and very stable."
"The tool helps to manage APIs."
"Allows the possibility of VPN technology to connect your gateway directly with on-prem services"
"We use Microsoft due to the stability of the company."
"I like the stability and the ease of use."
"I like API Management's ability to do hybrid cloud stuff."
"Azure APIM's best features are its straightforward access management (it's a single point of access for all monitoring and logging and for policy implementation) and its integration with the Azure Cloud infrastructure."
"API Management does not take long to deploy."
"The Portal lacks maturity. Since the move from Portal 3.x to 4.x, a lot of features were removed. It is slowly coming back. I can see a lot of changes are done in the "background" to decouple components and make it more flexible. Those changes are just not getting to the UI side quick enough."
"There are old algorithms that the tool does not support - and it shouldn't, in my opinion. But sometimes customers need old algorithms, from old use cases and old applications, migrated to the platform. At those times, there are hiccups that happen."
"They need a multifactor authentication solution for the API layer and the other layers, as well."
"It is not possible for clients to migrate to a newer version."
"The development portal could be improved."
"Some problems with response time."
"On the monitoring side, we need a better way to monitor it. CA has not given a clear understanding of what external tools we can use to do this."
"The developer portal needs to fully supported SOAP services (including WSDL publication with security), it would certainly push adoption for us."
"If I compare this solution to others I have used in other phases of my life, having APIM being an Azure resource, it is easy to configure and deploy. However, this conversely reduced the flexibility. The difficulty is how do we configure it in a manner that a larger enterprise would probably want it to be. This creates a bit more complexity, working around the constraints of the resource itself. If comparing it to other solutions, it is more of a legacy design with an older approach. The various level components are still around resembling an on-premise type of design similar to other solutions, such as Apigee or Mulesoft. They are still predominantly carrying some legacy design. Which might be suited for organizations where they have a more complex network layout. APIM is easy to deploy, but on the other side of that, it is constrained to how Azure has designed it to be."
"Sometimes when immediate support is required, it isn't available."
"There is always room for improvement. There should be more analytics abilities so you can know how much traffic there is. Log Analyzer isn't well integrated with this solution."
"It would be better if it were easier to transition to Azure from JIRA. For example, different nomenclature must be performed when you shift to Azure from JIRA. JIRA's storage, tasks, and ethics are treated differently from Azure. Here they might become functions, which is not an option in JIRA because that nomenclature difference is there. If someone has to get into the nomenclature, then there can be different tasks from clients, and here, they may be treated as functions. JIRA has sub-tasks, but sub-tasks don't exist in Azure. The nomenclature and the linking between ethics and a function and a story are different, and people may have to learn to adapt to the new nomenclature."
"Some of the DevOps stuff could be easier to work with. The migration paths are a little complicated, and moving code around could be more seamless. There should be less manual migration when several teams work together to publish code to the DevOps."
"This solution is only available as a cloud-based deployment and it would be very helpful to have an on-premises version."
"I could that the UI could be improved."
"Microsoft Azure API Management's most valuable features are the microservices we used to use. They were API callers to receive communication with the network and building system, to complete the request. The response would be through the processing system."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Layer7 API Management is ranked 10th in API Management with 110 reviews while Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 68 reviews. Layer7 API Management is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Layer7 API Management writes "Has great drag-and-drop features and it requires minimal coding ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". Layer7 API Management is most compared with Apigee, Kong Gateway Enterprise, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and IBM API Connect, whereas Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Kong Gateway Enterprise and 3scale API Management. See our Layer7 API Management vs. Microsoft Azure API Management report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
