We performed a comparison between Apigee and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Apigee has a slight edge in this comparison. Apigee is easy to deploy and received high marks for its analytics features. Some MuleSoft Anypoint users say that its deployment can be complex and that it needs better analytics tools.
"Apigee Analytics dashboard is useful to monitor transactions, error percentage, transaction latency, etc."
"The most valuable feature of Apigee is its simplicity of deploying an API and restricting access, like rate limit, with the API."
"Apigee provides good documentation."
"It's easy to use and the security features are valuable."
"It accelerates development and deployment processes."
"Apigee has better scalability than WSA."
"The most valuable feature is monetization."
"One of the best parts of this solution is the implementation as we did not need to use code or out-of-box policies. When it comes to the cloud-based architecture, there is a high level of reliability."
"The most effective features of Anypoint API Manager for policy enforcement include security enforcement, rate limiting, client enforcement, traffic control, service level agreement policies, and caching policies."
"The most valuable feature of Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is the gateway that is provided."
"Offers good integration and flexibility."
"Technical support has been helpful."
"MuleSoft has given the API solution a 3-tiered architecture. This means that there are multiple channels available in one application. The usability is very high."
"Both the cloud and on-premises options are available. Customers can leverage the MuleSoft Cloud platform to deploy the applications or set up their own online infrastructure to deploy applications."
"It is a good management tool for controlling purposes."
"The tool has a private area. It also has a cloud deployment option."
"Unlike WSA, Apigee does not have a partnership model, something which makes it a bit easier for companies such as ours to go with the former solution."
"What my clients don't like is that the on-premises solution is not being treated and maintained as well as the cloud solution."
"The analytical aspect of it could be better. I think it is fair if Apigee lets you configure some of the metrics of the key details you want to monitor in terms of analytics."
"In terms of the functionalities of a typical API gateway, Apigee is actually doing its job, but when it involves integration with backend applications, which some gateways have, I don't believe it has this functionality. You have to do Java or do some other low-level coding before you are able to do the integration. Apigee has a lot of components, which means that management will be a bit difficult. It probably has ten different components, and all of these components leverage open-source utilities, such as NGINX. When those open-source vendors upgrade their utility, Apigee usually lags behind because they need to do a lot of tests and any required development in their own platform. They need to do rigorous testing to make sure that nothing breaks. Because of that, it takes them a while to upgrade whatever components have been upgraded by the open-source vendor that owns the utility. We've been chasing them for a particular upgrade for well over a year and a half, and they have not done that upgrade. It is creating a security risk for us as an enterprise, but that upgrade has not been done, even though the open-source vendor, the owner of the utility, has upgraded it a long time ago."
"It would be good if the Apigee management allowed us to be able to consolidate many operations into single one for the gateway functionality."
"The caching capabilities are somewhat limited. This is more on the developer-oriented capabilities."
"The number one area this solution could be improved is by implementing support. Support is not a part of this solution."
"I see some lagging in regards to integration capacity"
"The initial setup is very complex."
"To improve Anypoint API Manager for the next release, it should focus on better consumption scalability, especially for smaller APIs."
"They should develop on MuleSoft as it would be a good way of improving API monetization."
"Since most components are situated in the cloud, there's one particular hosted in the cloud. This presents a considerable challenge. While all other components are implemented on-premises, this specific one isn't permitted to be hosted in the cloud as per customer requirements. Shifting this component to an on-premises environment requires a significant effort."
"When compared to other integration technologies, it is slightly higher."
"Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager could improve the monitoring because it is very poor quality and not user-friendly. It is not as good as other solutions on the market."
"The most important thing that should be improved is that it is too heavy."
"The pricing is a bit expensive."
More MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apigee is ranked 2nd in API Management with 82 reviews while MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager is ranked 4th in API Management with 49 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager writes "Responsive technical support, low tickets issued showing great stability, and limitless expansion". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, Amazon API Gateway, WSO2 API Manager and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Amazon API Gateway, IBM API Connect, Kong Gateway Enterprise and Layer7 API Management. See our Apigee vs. MuleSoft Anypoint 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.
Apigee for sure. Not only do you get the benefit of hybrid and on-prem deployments. As a gov entity, you will face those challenges. Over time you might want to use AWS/Azure clouds so you can migrate it accordingly or just use the PAYG on GCP with all the security Bells and Whistles. https://www.gartner.com/review...
I will choose MuleSoft due to its ease of use, integration extendibility, and product roadmap.
MuleSoft API Management is better because of the following reasons:
* Ease of initial setup & configuration
* Most robust features in API management: oath, throttling, and access levels can be done very easily.
* MuleSoft API-led connectivity & Integration solution (you can extend the API management solution with a flexible integration option). You can very easily extend APIM to integration.
* Very Clear Product roadmap including APIM, RPA and multi-cloud implementation.
The cost of both MuleSoft APIM & APIGEE is similar.
Compared to 3scale, Apigee API Management has a better API gateway for security and traffic management.
Apigee is better for API policy enablement compared to 3scale API Management. Apigee provides better support for GraphQL, OData, OAS2.