We compared WSO2 API Manager and Kong Enterprise based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
The setup process for WSO2 API Manager can vary in difficulty and complexity, taking approximately three months for full implementation. Some users found it straightforward, while others found it medium or difficult. Interactions with WSO2 could be improved according to some users. On the other hand, the installation process for Kong Enterprise was generally smooth and easy, with some users completing it within 15 to 20 minutes on average. Learning Lua script and seeking professional support were mentioned as challenges. Overall, the initial setup was considered reasonably easy and straightforward, taking a couple of weeks for some users.
WSO2 API Manager is highly regarded for its versatile authentication methods and extensive customization choices. It provides a user-friendly interface, thorough documentation, and exhibits stability and scalability. On the other hand, Kong Enterprise distinguishes itself with its network services based on plugins, robust authentication and authorization capabilities, and the ability to customize Lua scripts for observability.
The WSO2 API Manager has room for improvement in its user interface, user management system, security compliance, reverse proxy, multifactor authentication, and usability. Kong Enterprise, on the other hand, could improve its pricing, automatic data API creation, customization for integration, solutions for east-west communications and Zero Trust architecture, scaling up process, and developer portal with isolated data plans for federated teams.
The cost of setting up WSO2 API Manager can be expensive for users who need to run multiple instances and clusters. The specific cost is not provided, but it is stated to be less than 20,000 euros annually. In contrast, Kong Enterprise pricing is determined by factors like scale, licenses, and usage. While it is considered higher than comparable products, the licensing costs are reasonable.
The feedback regarding the customer service and support for WSO2 API Manager is varied, with certain customers expressing dissatisfaction. On the other hand, Kong Enterprise has garnered positive reviews for its customer service and support.
Comparison Results
In comparing WSO2 API Manager to Kong Enterprise, it is evident that they have distinct characteristics. WSO2 API Manager provides various authentication methods, ample customization choices, and a reliable, expandable platform. Nevertheless, it does have areas that need improvement, including an outdated user interface, intricate setup, and limited user management flexibility. Conversely, Kong Enterprise boasts a seamless installation process, valuable network services based on plugins, and commendable authentication and authorization features. Additionally, it receives praise for its customer service. However, it may necessitate learning Lua script and has room for enhancement in aspects such as pricing and customization.
"I like everything about it. It provides the security we need."
"The most valuable feature of Kong Enterprise is its capability to integrate with various security tools."
"Kong enterprise has significantly enhanced our ability to manage and secure our Microservices. Its most valuable feature is monitoring."
"In our buying companies' perspective, it was easier to use compared to other platforms. The markets were pretty familiar with the solutions."
"It boasts remarkable speed and stability, and these qualities, particularly the gateway's resilience, are standout features for me."
"Kong Enterprise comes with some ready plug-ins, which is very good for the customers."
"Kong Enterprise has excellent plugin support."
"There are a few features that I like about Kong when it comes to authentication and authorization. Specifically, being able to use Kong for role-based access control (RBAC), and then further being able to integrate the RBAC mechanism with our enterprise directory, was very useful."
"I think the best part about WSO2 API Manager is that it's highly customizable because it's open-source. The partnership model is quite lucrative for us, it helps us to go and pitch to our customers. You can build a lot of business models yourself that you want to use. You are able to do a lot of the solutions."
"Most of the time, we need to install a plug-in without having any lapse in services or restarting the application. The WSO2 platform can do all deployments without any downtime."
"One of the great things about WSO2 API Manager is that it is so easy to adopt. And because it's an open source solution, we're able to extend the implementation any time to suit our company needs better."
"Yes WSO2 API Manager is scalable"
"The documentation is good."
"Helped us to quickly publish our Microservice APIs and enforcing different policies against them, it comes up with features like Security, Throttling policy and it provides complete access to customize API's which actually saves development effort and time."
"A complete integration suite and a good platform."
"The solution is stable."
"Kong Enterprise has decided not to support the web portal feature anymore, but I think that feature should stay in the on-premises solution."
"Kong Enterprise can improve the customization to be able to do the integration properly."
"The developer portal needs to be improved."
"They could focus more on pricing."
"There should be an easier way to integrate with other solutions, even though it's the same API solution layer. Comparability will be a good improvement."
"Kong Enterprise needs to improve its pricing, which starts at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Pricing should be based on API usage rather than monthly. It should improve its documentation as well."
"Kong is meant for north-south communications, so it will be interesting to see what solutions they can come up with in the realms of east-west communications, service-to-service communications, and Zero Trust architecture. I believe that if they can provide for these areas, then they will be able to solve the overall integration and security concerns for microservices architecture in general."
"We would like to see an automatic data API when we have a table in the database."
"For fresh graduates and engineers, the setup process can be very difficult."
"The price and the complexities attached to the solution are two areas of concern where improvements are required."
"They are developing another platform called Choreo that allows you to create API itself using the WSO2 programming language Ballerina. It would be great if they added a direct connection between Choreo and API Manager, that would be great. I think they are working on that, but I'm not sure."
"WSO2 API Manager can be improved a lot relating to usability"
"Integration is an area that needs to be improved."
"I would like it to be a more stable solution. Maybe in the last version that is approved. For me it would be good if they had a community established version."
"The user interface needs to improve, it is a bit outdated."
"The stability is pretty good, but it could be improved."
Kong Gateway Enterprise is ranked 6th in API Management with 18 reviews while WSO2 API Manager is ranked 8th in API Management with 33 reviews. Kong Gateway Enterprise is rated 7.8, while WSO2 API Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kong Gateway Enterprise writes "Provides role-based access control and can be easily customized with Lua script". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WSO2 API Manager writes "Reliable with good capabilities and good support". Kong Gateway Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Apigee, Apache APISIX, Layer7 API Management and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, whereas WSO2 API Manager is most compared with Apigee, Amazon API Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, Apache APISIX and 3scale API Management. See our Kong Gateway Enterprise vs. WSO2 API Manager 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.