We performed a comparison between 3scale API Management and IBM API Connect 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."The most valuable features are the gateway and security features."
"The standard deployment is very simple."
"The gateway is the most valuable feature because it makes it possible for us to gather all traffic into one proxy, which is a good thing."
"I like the API automation."
"The product is stable."
"3scale API Management's best feature is API management."
"To me, the most valuable feature of 3scale API Management is that it lets you add a backend to the product. I also like that you can integrate it well with OpenShift clusters, making 3scale API Management a useful solution."
"The solution is quite lightweight, and the installation is very easy. It's like a two-click installation."
"API Connect's most valuable feature is its ability to act as a gateway. It's very easy to configure security and everything else in it. You don't have to kill yourself implementing custom configurations."
"It allows enterprises to expose some of their tech to outside stakeholders."
"The most valuable features are stability and security."
"The functionalities on offer are very good."
"Security is well organized and managed within the solution."
"The management of the API and API portal is good."
"The solution is very scalable because it's on the cloud."
"The statistics component is easy to use."
"I believe the CMS part of it has room for improvement though. That is where you write a couple of things if you want to publish your API. It's based on liquid scripting, which doesn't seem like the obvious ones to script with."
"The user experience could be better. The developer portal is too complex and hard to configure."
"The product is not that flexible for developers. It's less flexible and rigid. It's not easy to make changes or customize it."
"3scale API Management only supports restful APIs and doesn't support SOAP."
"We tried to use the portal, but we decided that it wasn't enough. The content management system (CMS) is not easy to use if you want to customize things, and it's hard to get someone who has the knowledge to work with the CMS."
"It would be helpful to improve the customization features so that the customer can do it based on their own needs."
"What I'd like to improve in 3scale API Management is its route-limiting feature. Currently, I don't know how to do that effectively on the solution, but in Kong, I know how to do it, so I would love to see route-limiting being easily done on 3scale API Management. It would also be good if there was some authentication that you could do from 3scale API Management because Kong offers that functionality out of the box. What I'd love to see in the next release of 3scale API Management is the ability to integrate more plug-ins easily onto the platform, so you'll be able to extend it, and even do customs management. If Red Hat could offer that extension where it allows the internal organization where 3scale API Management is deployed on-premise to integrate its tools on top of 3scale API Management and provide an API for that, that will make the solution very powerful."
"What was suggested by Red Hat was a crucial part of the configuration, but when we started to ask about the supportability of this configuration, Red Hat said only some parts of the configuration would be supported."
"While Azure API Management offers configurable scalability, IBM API Connect relies on Kubernetes clusters. This might seem manual and require defining cluster instances upfront, but it's completely customizable and not on-the-fly scaling. It's completely custom-driven, not on-the-fly scaling, which some may consider cumbersome."
"Support for this platform could still be improved. It also needs to have more levels of versatility. Its compatibility and integration with different platforms also need improvement."
"There are some performance issues and issues related to asynchronous APIs."
"The administration of the user interface and the technical documentation are areas of concern in the solution where improvements are required."
"Due to bugs in integration, we have to look for workaround on fixing and using DataPower as gateway."
"We ran it on top of the Kubernetes cluster, so it wasn't a standalone service. In the worst-case scenario, API Connect couldn't stay online if all the containers went down. We had to restart all the services. We shut down all the containers automatically one by one."
"The installation was difficult with the IBM toolkit."
"Business applications could be exposed to users."
3scale API Management is ranked 12th in API Management with 10 reviews while IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews. 3scale API Management is rated 7.4, while IBM API Connect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of 3scale API Management writes "Useful as it lets you add a backend to the product, it integrates well with clusters, and it has exceptional technical support, but route-limiting isn't easy to do on it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Good speed and performance, but it's based on a bit dated architecture". 3scale API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Kong Gateway Enterprise, Apigee, WSO2 API Manager and Microsoft Azure API Management, whereas IBM API Connect is most compared with Apigee, IBM DataPower Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Layer7 API Management. See our 3scale API Management vs. IBM API Connect 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.
