We performed a comparison between SwaggerHub and webMethods API Gateway 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."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 most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."
"The scalability is endless."
"It is a stable solution."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."
"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."
"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"There were no complexities involved in the setup phase...The product is able to meet my company's API protection needs."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."
"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
"Within the new version, webMethods API Gateway gives us an end-to-end lifecycle from the creation of the API up into the development, deployment, and promotion into production/live. The current end-to-end lifecycle of the API gives us enough authority and governance of the API. We know what are currently live services, what is in the testing stage of development, and what version that has been commissioned. So, the full life cycle itself gives us full authority and governance of the API."
"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."
"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."
"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."
"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."
"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."
"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."
"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."
"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"
"The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution."
"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate consumption plans and throttle all those consumption plans towards the run time could be better."
"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."
"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."
SwaggerHub is ranked 16th in API Management with 8 reviews while webMethods API Gateway is ranked 11th in API Management with 10 reviews. SwaggerHub is rated 7.8, while webMethods API Gateway is rated 8.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods API Gateway writes "We developed several services in the cloud using a sandbox environment for our last hackathon". SwaggerHub is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and RapidAPI, whereas webMethods API Gateway is most compared with Apigee, webMethods.io Integration, Kong Gateway Enterprise, 3scale API Management and webMethods Microgateway. See our SwaggerHub vs. webMethods API Gateway 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.
