We performed a comparison between Akana API Management and IBM API Connect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Google, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in API Management."Good interface, intuitive solution."
"The tool's authentication mechanism is easy to implement. We had to define a few parameters."
"It allowed us to publish and replace pre-essential transactions in one place, with a uniformity in terms of control and policies."
"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."
"IBM API Connect is a good product, and their technical support is excellent."
"API Connect is a good product, and everything works fine. All the analytics are good, and it is easy to follow up. I like it in that sense. I'm more focused on following up on analytics by seeing how many API calls we are getting and where we see a lot of problems. I was working on that API level."
"The most valuable feature of IBM API Connect is the security of the protocol."
"The most valuable feature is the security we get from this solution. I know of a bank that uses it to ensure that everything is secure. The second feature I like is the retail environment, where we actually want to be able to provide as many suppliers and consumers with APIs as possible. If you are well-trained in the writing of RESTful API's, you can actually publish an API in a matter of minutes, test it, and publish it."
"WSRR is a powerful component for getting the endpoints."
"The services that I consume through IBM API Connect are beneficial. It can handle multiple API management."
"Akana API Management needs to improve its documentation."
"The product has new features that we are going to implement in the next few months, such as API management and analytic reporting."
"Lacks an integrated billing feature."
"Business applications could be exposed to users."
"The documentation needs to be a bit better."
"The developmental process is not quite user-friendly."
"It would be nice to have a SaaS solution that can be deployed into the cloud."
"I would like to see support for non-Java based services. We struggle a bit to be able to deploy and connect our .NET services because of things like data types. We had to map a couple of things. For one solution provider, we had to move them to .NET Core before we could use it properly. I would like to see more agnostic tool service platforms rather than moving it more towards Java or open source."
"The integration of an API gateway that implements the sidecar pattern, which can be deployed in cloud applications, and expose the microservices directly in each pod, this can be more decentralized components."
"The developer portal could be easier to customize."
"The installation was difficult with the IBM toolkit."
Akana API Management is ranked 28th in API Management with 3 reviews while IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews. Akana API Management is rated 8.4, while IBM API Connect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Akana API Management writes "Authentication mechanism is easy to implement but improvement is needed in documentation ". 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". Akana API Management is most compared with Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas IBM API Connect is most compared with IBM DataPower Gateway, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Amazon API Gateway.
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.
