We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and IBM Cloud Pak for Integration 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."It has all of the tools that are needed for the specific mission."
"One of the most valuable features is the easy-to-use web interface."
"The most valuable features of IBM API Connect are its performance and user-friendliness."
"The most valuable feature of IBM API Connect is the security of the protocol."
"The technical support is good. Whenever we need anything, we have our IT team work with IBM to change whatever requirement is needed."
"The interface is very nice. It makes the solution easy to use and navigate."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is very easy to use and is something that is easily configurable."
"Policy configurations are pretty easy."
"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."
"The most preferable aspect would be the elimination of the command, which was a significant improvement. In the past, it was a challenge, but now we can proceed smoothly with the implementation of our policies and everything is managed through JCP. It's still among the positive aspects, and it's a valuable feature."
"It is a stable solution."
"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."
"There are issues with upgrading in the cloud version. The cloud version is extremely buggy. We prefer to use the on-premise version."
"IBM API Connect could improve the security of the application and the integration."
"It would be nice to have a SaaS solution that can be deployed into the cloud."
"Possible improvement is mainly around having more of the cloud oriented architecture bringing stability in adding new capabilities around security."
"Understanding the architecture, deployment criteria, and communication methods of the installation can be time-consuming."
"We've had some issues upgrading to the latest version of the solution."
"It is expensive within this class of products."
"While Azure API Management offers configurable scalability, IBM API Connect relies on Kubernetes clusters. This might seem manual and require defining cluster instances upfront, but it's completely customizable and not on-the-fly scaling. It's completely custom-driven, not on-the-fly scaling, which some may consider cumbersome."
"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."
"The pricing can be improved."
"Setting up Cloud Pak for Integration is relatively complex. It's not as easy because it has not yet been fully integrated. You still have some products that are still not containerized, so you still have to run them on a dedicated VM."
"The initial setup is not easy."
More IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is ranked 21st in API Management with 4 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is rated 8.6. 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 IBM Cloud Pak for Integration writes "A hybrid integration platform that applies the functionality of closed-loop AI automation". IBM API Connect is most compared with Apigee, IBM DataPower Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and WSO2 API Manager, whereas IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is most compared with IBM App Connect, IBM DataPower Gateway, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Microsoft Azure API Management and AWS Glue. See our IBM API Connect vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration 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.
