We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and IBM Datapower Gateway based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: All other things being equal, IBM Datapower Gateway has a slight edge in this comparison because it received higher marks than IBM API Connect in the service and support category.
"Its speed and performance are valuable."
"IBM API Connect is a good product, and their technical support is excellent."
"Easy to configure security and generate API keys."
"The developer portal has been the most useful feature."
"IBM API Connect is a reliable and scalable solution."
"Using API Connect allows us to quickly create proxy APIs and saves time on end-to-end testing, which lets us deliver quickly to clients."
"We are able to share those APIs instantly within the organization; even if we want to share it outside publicly, then we can have those capabilities."
"The functionalities on offer are very good."
"The product's most valuable features are AAA policies and security features."
"The performance is good. It's been very stable."
"The solution is stable."
"Support for PCA and non-PCA services is valuable."
"The MPGW (Multi-Protocol Gateway) is great because it allows you to easily expose services using various protocols – web services, REST (JSON), and others. This flexibility simplifies things."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is scalable, our customers are mostly South African banks and they handle mostly transactions with this solution."
"What I like most is the stability."
"One thing about API Connect that could be improved is the security schemes. There are so many security schemes, and from a product perspective, IBM could improve the user experience of the configuration security scheme."
"Business applications could be exposed to users."
"In the next version, I don't know if they've already been included it or not, but the designer and all the tools should be on the cloud. I don't want any external installation or local installation."
"The design time setup has a lot of customizable fields, but we need certain standard fields to be added, such as what all of the consuming systems are. This needs to be very clearly articulated during the design time."
"The solution is overly complex."
"It's based on a little bit dated architecture. A lot of evolution has happened after that. It's an evolving field. Kong is a Kubernetes-based platform. Kong runs on Kubernetes, but all the other ones are in microservices. So, there's a lot of improvement that can be done."
"We have asked IBM for scalability and for some other features that we wanted. We had a dialogue with them and in the end, they have agreed to provide us with features related to API setup and security."
"The documentation needs to be a bit better."
"Making it more user-friendly would be an improvement."
"The initial setup isn't so easy, you need who has experience working with the solution to help."
"One area that could be improved is the integration with Postgres and SQL databases. Currently, IBM DataPower Gateway only integrates with Oracle databases."
"For the workloads that are not too high, appliance is a little bit expensive."
"The components that they include in the product that are, in fact, a WTX, really need to be removed from the product because they tend to fail."
"An area for improvement in IBM DataPower Gateway is its price point because it's a relatively expensive product. Sometimes, when the customer use case is just a very small subset of what's being offered in IBM DataPower Gateway, then the product can be expensive, making my company lose some of the opportunities because of the expensive pricing. A lower price point for IBM DataPower Gateway, even if that results in a less feature-rich version, would be appreciated. In terms of additional features that I'd like to see in the next release of IBM DataPower Gateway, nothing specific comes to mind because IBM constantly improves its standards and provides quarterly updates to the product, so it's quite fine."
"Some pre-packaged connectors for integration with various applications, such as SaaS offerings, would be a useful addition."
"The product's cost for data appliances or hardware is quite high. It needs improvement."
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while IBM DataPower Gateway is ranked 7th in API Management with 27 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while IBM DataPower Gateway is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Good speed and performance, but it's based on a bit dated architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM DataPower Gateway writes "Security features meets compliance needs and offers MPGW (Multi-Protocol Gateway) that simplifies integration efforts ". IBM API Connect is most compared with Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and Kong Gateway Enterprise, whereas IBM DataPower Gateway is most compared with Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus and Kong Gateway Enterprise. See our IBM API Connect vs. IBM DataPower Gateway 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.
