We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and webMethods API Portal 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."The statistics component is easy to use."
"The centralized management: this provides a management module that can deploy and apply security policies to all APIs, including all the gateways that are deployed on-premises and on any cloud because the gateway component can run at a VMware or in a Kubernetes cluster."
"I have found IBM API Connect to be highly secure, efficient, easy to deploy, and has a great GUI. It can operate and integrate well with other vendors, such as Amazon, Google, and Microsoft."
"The technical support is good. Whenever we need anything, we have our IT team work with IBM to change whatever requirement is needed."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"The solution offers a pretty good SLA."
"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."
"I have found the API Management to be most valuable."
"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."
"It is good for communicating between the systems and for publishing and subscribing. We can easily retrieve data. It is good in terms of troubleshooting and other things."
"We have found the pricing of the solution to be fair."
"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."
"Different versions of the same thing can mean unnecessary duplication."
"It needs to be less taxing on compute resources."
"The implementation of IBM API Connect is complex, as it's an enterprise solution with many components that require more than one person. It's not a single product that you work on, and this is an area for improvement, but normally, it's good. Having a more structured model for IBM API Connect support is also room for improvement that would help customers better."
"Installation is weak."
"The solution would be better if it had cloud functionalities."
"Components, like caching, should be implemented as policies, not requiring dependency on an external solution."
"We would have more capability to interact with the catalog and inventories, so a more DevOps-friendly solution is needed."
"The on-premises setup can be difficult."
"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"
"Some of the things that we use cannot be done in this solution. For these things, we have to either use a Java service or a util service. There is no predefined or existing service that we can use. So, we have to work on the util service and write on top of it. Its price can also be better. It is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while webMethods API Portal is ranked 23rd in API Management with 3 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while webMethods API Portal is rated 7.6. 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 webMethods API Portal writes "Stable, with good technical support, but the on-premises version can be difficult to set up". IBM API Connect is most compared with IBM DataPower Gateway, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and SAP Cloud Platform, whereas webMethods API Portal is most compared with 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.
