We performed a comparison between Red Hat Fuse and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly."
"I found it was quite easy to set up and implement."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data."
"The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"It's very lightweight. There's no need for any specialized tools in order to deploy any service for Red Hat Fuse."
"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"It integrates well with various servers."
"We needed a tool that was able to orchestrate and help us configure our APIs so that we could maintain and see the heartbeat, traffic, trends, etc."
"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."
"The product is very stable."
"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."
"What I like best about webMethods Integration Server is its portfolio of connectors."
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."
"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
"Red Hat Fuse doesn't have a lot of administrative control like other applications."
"The monitoring experience should be better."
"For improvement, they can consider the way we collaborate with other applications...Right now, in Red Hat Fuse, everything is not available under one umbrella."
"The web tools need to be updated."
"The pricing model could be adjusted. The price should be lower."
"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."
"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."
"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."
"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."
"In terms of improvement, it would be better if it adapted quicker to open standards. It took a while for API specification before the last version was available. The spec of version two was rather quick."
"The orchestration is not as good as it should be."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Fuse is ranked 4th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 23 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Red Hat Fuse is rated 8.2, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Configurable, doesn't require much coding, and has an automatic load balancing feature, but its development features need improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi iPaaS. See our Red Hat Fuse vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.
With webMethods Integration Server, you have the power to connect anything faster, thanks to open, standards-based integration. Make custom, packaged and mainframe applications and databases—on-premises and in the cloud—interoperable and assure the fluid flow of data across your automated processes. Mapping and transformation functions are built-in.
pro's; Easy scalability, 300+ connectors, Faster integrations, "Lift & shift" integrations, Mapping and transformation & iPaaS integrations in the cloud
Where Red Hat Fuse, pros; Hybrid deployment, Built-in iPaaS with low-code UI/UX, Container-based integration & Integration everywhere supporting 200 included connectors.
Red Hat Fuse, based on open source communities like Apache Camel and Apache ActiveMQ, is part of an agile integration solution. Its distributed approach allows teams to deploy integrated services where required. The API-centric, container-based architecture decouples services so they can be created, extended, and deployed independently.
Hello Andhika
Please read Dave's reply first and understand that WebMethods offers many features that you will not find in RedHat Fuse.
I would like to add one more architectural point of view.
WebMethods provides a nice business process engine that helps you orchestrate your services. Fuse is not able to provide this kind of service.
If your processes are simple and map information, for example, use Fuse.
If your business processes are complex and require balancing, I recommend an integration tool with a business process engine (BPEL or BPMN). WebMethods, Oracle SOA Suite or OpenESB offer these types of tools.
If you plan to design complex processes, you should not hesitate to choose WebMethods.