We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure API Management and SwaggerHub 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."Initial setup was quite easy."
"The ease of setting up a new solution is the most valuable feature. It's very easy to set up a new solution and to deploy it to production."
"Monitoring: It gives us a detailed overview of how clients are using the API and it allows us to see the consumption trends in real-time."
"The API management is great."
"The mediation and translation from SOAP to REST technology makes it possible to open up legacy systems that couldn't be opened before."
"I like the API Management functions."
"Microsoft Azure API Management is 90 to 99 percent scalable. We have three instances running in parallel."
"The most valuable features are the API and integrations."
"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."
"Code generation is one of the important features of SwaggerHub. We design our API, and we can generate a very rich codebase and add to it. The code generation feature is very valuable."
"It is a stable solution."
"You can click & play and add the notation in a human-readable form. Spotlight is also very good in the graphical design of APIs."
"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."
"The scalability is endless."
"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."
"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."
"One of the most important improvements for us would be if it supported the HTTP/3 version and new protocol over a quick connection."
"Technical support could be more helpful and responsive."
"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."
"There is a limitation of 32 kb of data in the APIs. Having the limitation increase would be a benefit."
"It should be easier to integrate."
"In the next release, Azure APIM should include deployment in various environments and CI/CD for deployment."
"Other products have more customization options."
"API Management's price could be lower."
"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."
"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"
"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."
"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."
"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."
"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."
"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."
"SwaggerHub lacks in terms of integrations. They have APIs integrated, and they also have some connectors, but they don't have integration with many of the things that we use. For example, for connecting with SVN, we had to implement external scripts. So, they should work on the integration because currently, we have to work on the integration with our DevOps, continuous delivery, or continuous deployment. It would be great if these integrations are built-in. Mainly, we would like it to integrate with SVN and Jira."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 68 reviews while SwaggerHub is ranked 16th in API Management with 10 reviews. Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8, while SwaggerHub is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SwaggerHub writes "Simplifies API design and development for developers". Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Kong Gateway Enterprise and Layer7 API Management, whereas SwaggerHub is most compared with Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway, RapidAPI and 3scale API Management. See our Microsoft Azure API Management vs. SwaggerHub 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.
