We compared WSO2 API Manager and Kong Enterprise based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
The setup process for WSO2 API Manager can vary in difficulty and complexity, taking approximately three months for full implementation. Some users found it straightforward, while others found it medium or difficult. Interactions with WSO2 could be improved according to some users. On the other hand, the installation process for Kong Enterprise was generally smooth and easy, with some users completing it within 15 to 20 minutes on average. Learning Lua script and seeking professional support were mentioned as challenges. Overall, the initial setup was considered reasonably easy and straightforward, taking a couple of weeks for some users.
WSO2 API Manager is highly regarded for its versatile authentication methods and extensive customization choices. It provides a user-friendly interface, thorough documentation, and exhibits stability and scalability. On the other hand, Kong Enterprise distinguishes itself with its network services based on plugins, robust authentication and authorization capabilities, and the ability to customize Lua scripts for observability.
The WSO2 API Manager has room for improvement in its user interface, user management system, security compliance, reverse proxy, multifactor authentication, and usability. Kong Enterprise, on the other hand, could improve its pricing, automatic data API creation, customization for integration, solutions for east-west communications and Zero Trust architecture, scaling up process, and developer portal with isolated data plans for federated teams.
The cost of setting up WSO2 API Manager can be expensive for users who need to run multiple instances and clusters. The specific cost is not provided, but it is stated to be less than 20,000 euros annually. In contrast, Kong Enterprise pricing is determined by factors like scale, licenses, and usage. While it is considered higher than comparable products, the licensing costs are reasonable.
The feedback regarding the customer service and support for WSO2 API Manager is varied, with certain customers expressing dissatisfaction. On the other hand, Kong Enterprise has garnered positive reviews for its customer service and support.
Comparison Results
In comparing WSO2 API Manager to Kong Enterprise, it is evident that they have distinct characteristics. WSO2 API Manager provides various authentication methods, ample customization choices, and a reliable, expandable platform. Nevertheless, it does have areas that need improvement, including an outdated user interface, intricate setup, and limited user management flexibility. Conversely, Kong Enterprise boasts a seamless installation process, valuable network services based on plugins, and commendable authentication and authorization features. Additionally, it receives praise for its customer service. However, it may necessitate learning Lua script and has room for enhancement in aspects such as pricing and customization.
"It boasts remarkable speed and stability, and these qualities, particularly the gateway's resilience, are standout features for me."
"The tool's scalability is good...The solution's technical support is good."
"In our buying companies' perspective, it was easier to use compared to other platforms. The markets were pretty familiar with the solutions."
"Kong Enterprise comes with some ready plug-ins, which is very good for the customers."
"The solution provides good performance."
"I like everything about it. It provides the security we need."
"Kong enterprise has significantly enhanced our ability to manage and secure our Microservices. Its most valuable feature is monitoring."
"The route limiting feature is very valuable."
"The solution is open source and easy to configure."
"WSO2 API Manager is easy to use."
"Most of the time, we need to install a plug-in without having any lapse in services or restarting the application. The WSO2 platform can do all deployments without any downtime."
"It's a good product."
"It is possible to scale up and scale down with the solution...I can say that I have not seen any issues related to scalability."
"WSO2 is very stable."
"The flexibility is definitely a highlight. We have flexible mapping capabilities, allowing us to provide common mappings or create custom ones as needed."
"As far as I am aware this solution is the first API Publisher that allows you to create and publish API and to manage the API lifecycle."
"Kong is meant for north-south communications, so it will be interesting to see what solutions they can come up with in the realms of east-west communications, service-to-service communications, and Zero Trust architecture. I believe that if they can provide for these areas, then they will be able to solve the overall integration and security concerns for microservices architecture in general."
"It becomes difficult if you try to scale it up to multiple clusters."
"The solution should include policy features that are available in other solutions like MuleSoft API manager but missing in Kong Enterprise."
"The developer portal needs to be improved."
"They could focus more on pricing."
"There should be an easier way to integrate with other solutions, even though it's the same API solution layer. Comparability will be a good improvement."
"We would like to see an automatic data API when we have a table in the database."
"Because it is open-source, it should be less expensive than others."
"I think they could greatly improve the general UX with their solutions."
"The price and the complexities attached to the solution are two areas of concern where improvements are required."
"WSO2 API Manager can be improved a lot relating to usability"
"We found WSO2 API Manager to be a bit complex."
"The initial setup can be difficult."
"I would like it to be a more convenient development platform with the ability to write orchestrations and so on. Our problem with this product is that in my country, we are the only enterprise that has been using this product. We're missing a lot of knowledge from colleagues to consult with, and we also aren't able to recruit people with relevant skills. It is a big problem. The small team that is maintaining this product is the only team that can actually relate to any technical issue. The support that we're getting from the company is not great. There is also a cultural gap there because they're from Sri Lanka, and it is not easy. They're putting in a lot of effort, but they are not meeting our expectations."
"They don't have different URLs for administrators."
"API Manager is not easy to scale because some of its components lack scalability. It's a difficult point. Especially because companies are so cloud-based these days, microservice scalability is a major thing."
Kong Gateway Enterprise is ranked 6th in API Management with 20 reviews while WSO2 API Manager is ranked 8th in API Management with 33 reviews. Kong Gateway Enterprise is rated 7.8, while WSO2 API Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kong Gateway Enterprise writes "Provides role-based access control and can be easily customized with Lua script". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WSO2 API Manager writes "Reliable with good capabilities and good support". Kong Gateway Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Apigee, Apache APISIX, Layer7 API Management and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, whereas WSO2 API Manager is most compared with Apigee, Amazon API Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, Apache APISIX and 3scale API Management. See our Kong Gateway Enterprise vs. WSO2 API Manager 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.