We performed a comparison between Apigee and SwaggerHub 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 developer portal is very useful to customers."
"Anyone with basic knowledge can build an API."
"The security provided by the solution is excellent."
"The use case which I have installed serves the intended purpose."
"The most valuable feature of Apigee is its simplicity of deploying an API and restricting access, like rate limit, with the API."
"It accelerates development and deployment processes."
"The initial setup isn't too complex."
"I like implementing different policies, for example, rate-limiting policy."
"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."
"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."
"Code generation is one of the important features of SwaggerHub. We design our API, and we can generate a very rich codebase and add to it. The code generation feature is very valuable."
"The scalability is endless."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."
"You can click & play and add the notation in a human-readable form. Spotlight is also very good in the graphical design of APIs."
"The solution could add even more functionalities."
"The developer portal's adoption of the OpenAPI standard needs to be improved. In the latest version of the developer portal, they have adopted the OpenAPI standard. This feature, however, can be improved by supporting more characteristics of the OpenAPI standard."
"They need to work on the cost of the solution."
"Apigee's user interface could be more straightforward and have more options. Also, it would be nice if it were ready to work out of the box without so much configuration."
"Apigee on premise is quite complex and it is always moving faster."
"I have heard there maybe be some security issues that need to be addressed. If this is the situation I would encourage taking a look at the security matters."
"I would like them to add features, such as caching and mediation policies."
"I would like to see SOAP services and socket-based connectivity developed."
"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."
"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."
"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"
"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."
"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."
"SwaggerHub lacks in terms of integrations. They have APIs integrated, and they also have some connectors, but they don't have integration with many of the things that we use. For example, for connecting with SVN, we had to implement external scripts. So, they should work on the integration because currently, we have to work on the integration with our DevOps, continuous delivery, or continuous deployment. It would be great if these integrations are built-in. Mainly, we would like it to integrate with SVN and Jira."
"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."
"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."
Apigee is ranked 2nd in API Management with 82 reviews while SwaggerHub is ranked 16th in API Management with 10 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while SwaggerHub is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SwaggerHub writes "An easy-to-use solution for the entry point of API documentation that needs to introduce some regulatory controls". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, Amazon API Gateway, WSO2 API Manager and TIBCO Cloud API Management, whereas SwaggerHub is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway, RapidAPI and 3scale API Management. See our Apigee vs. SwaggerHub 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.