We performed a comparison between Apigee and Layer 7 API Management based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Apigee has very high availability and makes it easy for users to manage the entire lifecycle of the API. It offers vast opportunities for easy customization. Users find some of Layer 7 API Management’s tools and features difficult to implement and bulky, causing processes to slow down. Layer 7 could also use more cloud-native features.
"Tracing in Apigee is a very good feature."
"It's easy to use and the security features are valuable."
"It's stable."
"We use it to build API proxies for securing targeted back-ends with an emphasis on Continuous Integration/Continuous Development (CI/CD)."
"Apigee is relatively easy to use for developers."
"Items around the mobilization of the API interface and the ability to automate validations for our APIs are the most valuable aspects."
"Technical support has been decent."
"It is easy to deploy, configure, and monitor the APA."
"API Management makes dealing with APIs easier. It'll help you to move ahead on your API application journey. The solution allows developers to create more advanced security policies"
"There are a couple aspects of performance. One is just speed and uptime, and it's stellar in that regard. The other is, how much effort is it to put it in place in the first place, and then how much effort is it to keep it operational. That's where its real strength is. I'm able to do things quickly and easily that I couldn't do before."
"You can create little, custom Java assertions that you can insert to do your business logic, which might not be covered by the commercial product out-of-the-box."
"The Mobile API Gateway is also great."
"This product, at first blush, looks something like it's one of those weekend warrior tools, but it's not. It's an enterprise-class tool with the kind of usability that you wouldn't expect. And with that usability - how do you have your cake and eat it too? Well, it's because of the product's extensibility. It's very well-integrated with your existing Java library of processes and procedures, as well as your ability to write new extensions to it. You get so much of the base functionality but you don't give up the ability customize."
"We have more than 50 applications in the backend. We monitor the infrastructure through a database monitoring tool. Our daily tasks involve working on P1 incidents, managing change requests, conducting patching updates, working on P2 tickets, backend server certificate renewals, etc."
"The Gateway can front our APIs very easily."
"The level of technical support is good."
"Apigee lacks market presence."
"The setup and installation process could be improved with a container-based system."
"Apigee is demanding on the infrastructure so the setup cost is very high for an on-premises deployment."
"iPaaS is something that we would like to see. For example, MuleSoft is kind of an integrated platform as a service (iPaaS), and it provides a lot of out-of-the-box connectors and other such things. This is where Apigee lacks. I'm not sure if that's the roadmap for Apigee, but any improvements on those lines would be helpful where things become easier to implement."
"The number one area this solution could be improved is by implementing support. Support is not a part of this solution."
"It needs predictive analysis of consumption."
"Integration should be improved."
"Apigee could do more to make users aware of what is available in the add-ons."
"The product needs to keep up with newer trends even though customers might not be requesting it yet."
"The only issue we have is that we have to buy an APM license separately for end-to-end monitoring."
"The solution should prioritize ease of use and align with the growing trend of cloud-native environments."
"The delivery is bulky in terms of implementation. Its price could also be better. It is a very good product as compared to CA API, Google API, and WSO2 API, but its price is high. From the cloud-native perspective, some new features need to be added. It could also be made simpler to implement."
"The security protocols in CA's product, for financial services, weren't as good as those in API Connect."
"The Portal is not stable."
"If they had different levels of support available then it would be easier to justify the costs."
"Some users say that the API lacks some features and is lagging behind the competition although that has not been my personal experience."
Apigee is ranked 2nd in API Management with 82 reviews while Layer7 API Management is ranked 10th in API Management with 109 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while Layer7 API Management is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Layer7 API Management writes "Has great drag-and-drop features and it requires minimal coding ". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, Amazon API Gateway, WSO2 API Manager and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas Layer7 API Management is most compared with Kong Gateway Enterprise, Amazon API Gateway, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Microsoft Azure API Management and IBM API Connect. See our Apigee vs. Layer7 API Management 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.
