We performed a comparison between Mule Anypoint Platform and SAP Process Orchestration based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: When choosing a Business-to-Business Middleware tool Mule Anypoint Platform slightly nudges ahead of SAP Process Orchestration. PeerSpot users feel Mule Anypoint Platform can help organizations simplify the development of products and increase productivity. The solution provides a valuable API toolkit and intuitive monitoring capabilities. Many users feel SAP Process Orchestration should be more scalable and user friendly.
"The API toolkit is the solution's most valuable aspect at this time, for our organization."
"The tool's visual features are attractive."
"The most valuable feature is the variety of characters Anypoint Platform has. It is very scalable and customizable."
"The product’s ability to seamlessly translate protocols is great."
"It is a stable product...The initial setup was simple."
"The community manager is the standout feature of the Mule Anypoint Platform, as it provides a platform to showcase your API to external parties. It is exceptionally user-friendly and enables external parties to easily utilize and consume the APIs."
"The most valuable features for us are flexibility, all the features related to connectivity with multiple connectors to the business, and the flexibility of on-premises and cloud deployments."
"It can scale."
"The solution is stable."
"In my opinion, SAP PO is the most mature suite of tools to integrate processes across SAP environments at this moment. It's really unbeatable because it allows you to integrate whatever scenarios you can imagine."
"The most valuable features of SAP Process Orchestration are the standard APIs that we can use."
"The solution provides very good and central logging systems. It offers high flexibility with vertical and horizontal extend capacity."
"The monitoring is one of the greatest features in Process Orchestration because it is user-friendly and easy for somebody who is not experienced."
"Great monitoring tools and has its own alert framework."
"I rate the product's setup phase a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy since it is a very easy process."
"It is strategically focused to forecast a global integration platform for our business."
"This becomes an expensive solution over time."
"The stability could be better."
"In order to set up a storefront, we currently rely on a third-party solution. It would greatly enhance our operations if this feature was integrated into their existing solution."
"Pricing is one aspect of the solution that is troublesome. It's too expensive for smaller organizations."
"I would like to see some data integration and automation."
"Its documentation needed a little bit of work to make it more usable. It is a platform that is used mainly by developers and other people for connecting systems. Its documentation was confusing in some areas and was not very helpful in other areas. I had to go to a consultant to get some work done, which ideally shouldn't be required."
"It has different types of subscriptions. For platinum or lower subscriptions, there are not too many things that can be done. We don't see many features. They should release a basic version that has logging and monitoring features. These features should come with Mule Anypoint Platform for free instead of making customers pay separately for these features. Its dashboard can be improved to have a lot of charts so that it is easy to visualize information. The utilization part can be improved. The dashboard is good currently, but it can be better. Other solutions like Elastic have a good dashboard, and they allow you to administer the product from the UI. Currently, for RTF, there is a different dashboard or utility. It would be good to include the same utility in the cloud solution. It would be good if there is a centralized repository that includes the links to the information about various troubleshooting issues. The documentation is there currently, and it is good, but the troubleshooting information is too scattered. We have to go to different links to find troubleshooting information. This kind of centralized repository would be helpful for new customers who are implementing this solution. It will be helpful to see different kinds of issues that can occur."
"Code quality, Code Security, SaaS, and DaaS security, can all be improved."
"In terms of technical support, it would be helpful if they handled the tickets a bit faster when queries are sent to them."
"The monitoring governance offered by SAP is too technical and needs to be geared more toward business users."
"It's very difficult to find errors in a simple way."
"Process Orchestration doesn't provide authentication for data sent to us, meaning we have to rely on client certificate-based or basic authentication."
"It requires some maintenance."
"The solution could improve by making it more user-friendly by limiting the code required. We have to add some code in some cases where we need complex logic or some other functions. If this was able to be done in a more simplified manner then it would save a lot of effort and time."
"SAP needs to improve a lot in terms of the orchestration part so that more adapters can be provided to users, which are areas where the solution has downsides."
"It is scalable, but there can be performance issues with high data volume or traffic, especially during month ends."
Mule Anypoint Platform is ranked 2nd in Business-to-Business Middleware with 41 reviews while SAP Process Orchestration is ranked 1st in Business-to-Business Middleware with 28 reviews. Mule Anypoint Platform is rated 8.2, while SAP Process Orchestration is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Mule Anypoint Platform writes "Robust, reliable, and stable, ensuring high availability for critical integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Process Orchestration writes "A tool that can be useful for small integrations and large integrations". Mule Anypoint Platform is most compared with MuleSoft Composer, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, Oracle Integration Cloud Service, SAP Cloud Platform and Azure Data Factory, whereas SAP Process Orchestration is most compared with SAP Data Services, webMethods Integration Server, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, IBM B2B Integrator and IBM App Connect. See our Mule Anypoint Platform vs. SAP Process Orchestration report.
See our list of best Business-to-Business Middleware vendors and best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Business-to-Business Middleware 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.