We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and Microsoft Azure API Management based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure API Management provides DevOps by default and has a robust marketplace where users can easily integrate with existing APIs and begin work immediately. It scales easily and integrates seamlessly with Azure cloud infrastructure. In contrast, many users feel IBM is a bit dated and is lacking cloud-focused tools.It is also more difficult to deploy.
"The solution is very stable."
"It's quite flexible and easy to deploy, especially for beginners. It has almost all the features that an API gateway should have."
"The support is good and active. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten."
"The gateway is the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"I have found the API Management to be most valuable."
"The developer portal has been the most useful feature."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to distribute work among our API developers, so we don't have to do all the work as IBM API Connect administrators and IBM DataPower administrators."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"The UI management is very easy to use."
"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."
"The solution is reliable and very stable."
"We use Microsoft due to the stability of the company."
"It is easy to use."
"Microsoft Azure API Management is better because it has a DevOps integration by default."
"This solution is very flexible, and it's very compatible with the other Azure products."
"We're very satisfied with Azure API Management. We've had no issues with bugs, everything runs smoothly, and the connection between the cloud and the on-premise infrastructure was good."
"One thing about API Connect that could be improved is the security schemes. There are so many security schemes, and from a product perspective, IBM could improve the user experience of the configuration security scheme."
"It would be helpful to have access monitoring."
"We've had some issues upgrading to the latest version of the solution."
"The new version is very unstable."
"IBM info-center help documentation also needs improvement. Competitive product like Apigee provide out of the box policies to run Javascript, JAVA and better/flexible logging policies."
"The solution could improve security and performance."
"Business applications could be exposed to users."
"I would like to see automation of the installation. If there could be a single-click function where you could automate everything, that would be helpful."
"The developer portal can be improved."
"There is room for improvement in the user interface and workflow for hosting APIs, especially third-party APIs."
"The integration with other API gateways is where they might try to improve."
"The implementation has room for improvement and can be more user-friendly."
"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."
"The user interface needs improvement."
"They're trying to implement versioning and trying to be able to manage different versions of your API all at the same time, but they're not doing that just quite right yet."
"Microsoft Azure API Management needs to improve stability."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 68 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Offers basic API orchestration and provides robust security and governance features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". IBM API Connect is most compared with IBM DataPower Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and 3scale API Management, whereas Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Kong Gateway Enterprise and WSO2 API Manager. See our IBM API Connect 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.