We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and Oracle API Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Google, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in API Management."Policy configurations are pretty easy."
"It offers enhanced security features to protect APIs, enforce access control, and secure sensitive data."
"It is easy to use and stable."
"The support is good and active. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten."
"The solution provides a common place for all APIs, allowing for easy sharing and exchange of information between internal and external stakeholders."
"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."
"Easy to configure security and generate API keys."
"Its speed and performance are valuable."
"The initial setup isn't overly difficult."
"The most valuable features for us are security and centralization."
"It is very secure, easy to manage, and easy to configure. It is a web-based API. Moreover, we get direct support from Oracle guys."
"The security, the authentication, and the publishing qualities are great."
"Business applications could be exposed to users."
"The new version is very unstable."
"Different versions of the same thing can mean unnecessary duplication."
"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."
"The product's setup phase and its setup for the users in different environments, along with DevOps integration, are areas of concern where there is a need for improvement."
"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."
"We would have more capability to interact with the catalog and inventories, so a more DevOps-friendly solution is needed."
"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."
"From an administration and developer point of view, the user interface and user experience are not great."
"Before gaining experience with the product, I found that it was not simple to use and things took longer to do than I had anticipated."
"We'd like it if they could reduce the cost without sacrificing on features."
"Oracle should actively seek feedback and tailor the approach to client needs. It shouldn't always be about pushing additional products."
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while Oracle API Management is ranked 21st in API Management with 5 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while Oracle API Management is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Offers basic API orchestration and provides robust security and governance features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle API Management writes "Provides robust security for financial transactions and protects the ERP database from direct exposure". IBM API Connect is most compared with IBM DataPower Gateway, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Amazon API Gateway, whereas Oracle API Management is most compared with Apigee and Microsoft Azure API Management.
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.