We performed a comparison between webMethods API Gateway and webMethods.io Integration 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."In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."
"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."
"There were no complexities involved in the setup phase...The product is able to meet my company's API protection needs."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"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."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."
"I like the tool's scalability."
"The solution is scalable."
"The connectivity that the tool provides, along with the functionalities needed for our company's business, are some of the beneficial aspects of the product."
"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."
"There's hardware, software and application integration, providing hosting flexibility."
"It's easy to construct new interfaces like apps and client portals."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"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."
"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."
"The price has room for improvement."
"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."
"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."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
"The solution's release management feature could be better."
"It is difficult to maintain."
"webMethods.io Integration's installation is complex. It should also improve integration and connectors."
"The products, at the moment, are new and there should perhaps be support for the older version of the protocols."
"Rules engine processes and BPM processes should be improved."
"The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."
webMethods API Gateway is ranked 11th in API Management with 10 reviews while webMethods.io Integration is ranked 29th in API Management with 7 reviews. webMethods API Gateway is rated 8.2, while webMethods.io Integration is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of webMethods API Gateway writes "We developed several services in the cloud using a sandbox environment for our last hackathon". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods.io Integration writes "Though the tool provides great connectivity functionality, it needs to be made more stable". webMethods API Gateway is most compared with Apigee, Kong Gateway Enterprise, 3scale API Management, webMethods Microgateway and CentraSite, whereas webMethods.io Integration is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, SAP Cloud Platform, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management and StreamSets. See our webMethods API Gateway vs. webMethods.io Integration 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.
