We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure API Management and WSO2 API Manager based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Many users are heavily invested in Microsoft Azure products, making Microsoft Azure API Management more widely used and trusted. Additionally, WSO2 API lacks some new features and updated functionalities that other API solutions commonly provide. In terms of pricing, however, users are happier with WSO2.
"The initial setup is not that complex, but there are certain challenges."
"Azure API Management is an API gateway that can be used for different purposes, for example, to monetize APIs."
"It's a very robust tool. So you see that there is a developer portal which can be used by developer or the vendors as well. And other external partners to create keys and manage their own APIs. The other thing is that they have a lot of policies there are too many options within API. So I do the difficult to tell one, but probably I would say, like, proxy sorry. The policies is one of the thing wherein you can just configure the policies and modify the behavior of the APIs."
"Microsoft Azure API Management is better because it has a DevOps integration by default."
"We're pretty much using all of the monetizations features out of the API manager so we can put up a portal and have a dev portal and then a prod portal and do rate limiting."
"Azure API is scalable."
"The user management is pretty seamless."
"Microsoft Azure API Management is 90 to 99 percent scalable. We have three instances running in parallel."
"Most of the time, we need to install a plug-in without having any lapse in services or restarting the application. The WSO2 platform can do all deployments without any downtime."
"WSO2 API Manager is easy to use."
"It is possible to scale up and scale down with the solution...I can say that I have not seen any issues related to scalability."
"The solution is stable."
"One of the great things about WSO2 API Manager is that it is so easy to adopt. And because it's an open source solution, we're able to extend the implementation any time to suit our company needs better."
"The main feature — the publication of the API, the management section — is great in general."
"The solution is open source and easy to configure."
"There are a lot of tools to help the manager. WSO2 is very easy to install. It has all the principal functionalities that you think about when you want to put up the management solution. It's a very friendly tool."
"The hybrid part could be improved because API Management is entirely cloud-based, but some of our resources are on-prem, so formatting is an issue. Our goal is dual implementation."
"What would make Microsoft Azure API Management better are more APIs. They keep updating their APIs, but it would be better if the solution had more APIs for the services and more integration with other platforms."
"The product needs to introduce a developer portal."
"The solution’s security and performance could be improved."
"Sometimes when immediate support is required, it isn't available."
"The user interface needs improvement."
"The developer portal can be improved."
"The portal where we publish the APIs could be improved. Maybe this is because we didn't configure it. It is quite easy to bypass API management because we have a lot of information shared on the portal, where we publish our APIs. I worry there is potential for a security breach in the API publishing. There needs to be more security available on terms of the way we publish them."
"WSO2 API Manager should improve its marketplace subscription model and documentation in order to reach a higher level in the market."
"Basically, mTLS is a certificate-based communication protocol that WSO2 API Manager doesn't support."
"I would like it to be a more convenient development platform with the ability to write orchestrations and so on. Our problem with this product is that in my country, we are the only enterprise that has been using this product. We're missing a lot of knowledge from colleagues to consult with, and we also aren't able to recruit people with relevant skills. It is a big problem. The small team that is maintaining this product is the only team that can actually relate to any technical issue. The support that we're getting from the company is not great. There is also a cultural gap there because they're from Sri Lanka, and it is not easy. They're putting in a lot of effort, but they are not meeting our expectations."
"Providing easy configuration for email and SMS notifications, layout and customization of admin and developer landing pages."
"The user interface needs to improve, it is a bit outdated."
"Integration is an area that needs to be improved."
"From what I have experienced from the versions I have tried, they could improve on the multi-tenant environments to allow some kind of SSO single sign-on between tenant."
"We found WSO2 API Manager to be a bit complex."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 68 reviews while WSO2 API Manager is ranked 8th in API Management with 33 reviews. Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8, while WSO2 API Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WSO2 API Manager writes "Reliable with good capabilities and good support". Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Kong Gateway Enterprise and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas WSO2 API Manager is most compared with Apigee, Kong Gateway Enterprise, Amazon API Gateway, Apache APISIX and 3scale API Management. See our Microsoft Azure API Management vs. WSO2 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.
