We performed a comparison between webMethods Integration Server and WSO2 Enterprise Integrator 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."Broker and UM are the best features."
"It's obvious that the heart of the product lies here. It's comprised of all aspects of ESB (Enterprise Gateway, Adapter, TN, Java) and BPM (task, rules engine)."
"Segregation of deployment for the environments is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"The most valuable feature of webMethods Integration Server is all the capabilities it provides. We leverage most of the features, that they have offered to us. Our vendor has made some additional features on top of the webMethods Integration Server and we use all the features together."
"It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career."
"How simple it is to create new solutions."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"Application integration, business process integration, and B2B partner integration are valuable. But among these, I feel B2B partner integration is the most valuable. This module integrates two business partners and exchanges data through electronic data interchange messages in the form of specific standards, without any manual process needed."
"The solution has two main parts: integration and transformation. It's very user-friendly and easy to understand for everyone."
"Currently, I find the configuration part quite valuable, where you can easily configure things."
"I like the user-friendly system and development of the service-oriented architecture."
"WSO2's analytics capability is good, considering the ELC support they provide."
"The customer service executives are very responsive."
"The solution's technical support is very knowledgeable."
"The drag-and-drop features for connectors are very valuable."
"The solution basically conforms to our standards."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
"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."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"Version control is not very easy. The packages and the integration server are on Eclipse IDE, but you can't compare the code from the IDE. For example, if you are working on Java code, doing version control and deployment for a quick comparison between the code isn't easy. Some tools or plug-ins are there, such as CrossVista, and you can also play with an SVN server where you have to place your package, and from there, you can check, but you have to do that as a separate exercise. You can't do it from the IDE or webMethods server. You can't just right-click and upload your service."
"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."
"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"The micro integrator should be improved. There is room for enhancement considering alternative integration components."
"You cannot include the validation of XPath."
"WSO2 libraries are not mature enough. For example, if you want to integrate with Kafka using its Kafka library, it often has many bugs."
"They should release upgrades more frequently."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would like to see better documentation for the open-source version."
"I would like to see them bring back a feature, from earlier versions, that was very useful in debugging and finding issues."
"In my opinion, the administration model and interface, of Carbon, are lacking in terms of its features and user experience."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews while WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is ranked 7th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 18 reviews. webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0, while WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator writes "Consolidated, reliable, and has responsive technical support". webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and IBM BPM, whereas WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is most compared with Red Hat Fuse, Oracle Service Bus, IBM Integration Bus, Talend Open Studio and Mule ESB. See our WSO2 Enterprise Integrator 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.