We performed a comparison between Apigee and webMethods.io API 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."The analytics function and the developer portal are the two valuable features of Apigee. The analytics part is very good, and the developer portal is quite rich in features."
"The stability of the solution is good. There aren't issues surrounding bugs or glitches. We don't find that it crashes or freezes. It's pretty reliable."
"Great flexibility with its features."
"Apigee has better scalability than WSA."
"It accelerates development and deployment processes."
"Apigee is very easy to use, and you can code in any language."
"This is a front-layer gateway that helps to improve our overall performance."
"The features I found most valuable are how the APIs are published, the whole process of finalizing the API, and then controlling it."
"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."
"The performance is good."
"Role-based access management needs to be improved. It would also be nice if the solution could be integrated with code versioning systems like Git/Bitbucket."
"I'd like this solution to improve on releasing new features; I'd like it to be more frequent."
"There should be an integrated continuous integration and continuous deployment approach with Apigee. Currently, for development at a more integrated level, you have set it up yourself."
"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."
"I would like to see SOAP services and socket-based connectivity developed."
"Integration should be improved."
"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."
"Access restrictions can be improved."
"A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility."
"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."
Apigee is ranked 2nd in API Management with 82 reviews while webMethods.io API is ranked 30th in API Management with 2 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while webMethods.io API is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods.io API writes "Offers a strategic toolset for gradual integration advancement". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, Amazon API Gateway, WSO2 API Manager and Layer7 API Management, whereas webMethods.io API is most compared with MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager. See our Apigee vs. webMethods.io API 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.