We performed a comparison between IBM App Connect and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's a powerful application for collaboration. It has many features for customization and integration."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendliness of the application."
"When using IBM stacks, IBM App Connect is suitable and integrates well with other IBM products like WebSphere."
"It has different type of interfaces that can integrate with companies."
"It's stable to use, connect with the cloud, and to deploy."
"The solution is fast and supports Open UI 3.0 certification."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"I would say that the most valuable feature is the array of connectors and integration tools."
"Currently, we're using this solution for the integration server which helps us to integrate with the mainframe."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"Given that you have one integration API in place, it takes very minimal effort to scale it to any other application that might want to use the same. Its flow-based development environment is a breeze and makes it really easy to re-use most of the existing components and build up a new API."
"We needed a tool that was able to orchestrate and help us configure our APIs so that we could maintain and see the heartbeat, traffic, trends, etc."
"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."
"From a user perspective, the feature which I like the most about Integration Server is its designer."
"The solution has a very comprehensive and versatile set of connectors. I've been able to utilize it for multiple, different mechanisms. We do a lot of SaaS and we do have IoT devices and the solution is comprehensive in those areas."
"It integrates well with various servers."
"The installation of containers could be simplified, as it currently requires a senior-level installer."
"Plugins for the repositories are difficult to find."
"The user interface of IBM App Connect can be a little bit more user-friendly, I would say because the first-time developer is onboarded while using IBM App Connect, he or she may get a little intimidated or daunted looking at all the options available or the pipelines, et cetera."
"More connectors could be available for the product as some of the third-party software doesn't have default connectors."
"IBM needs to enhance and have a stronger offering for the event streaming part because this is the future needed for the containerization and the new integration requirement."
"In the next release, I would like to get some quality connectors."
"IBM App Connect is scalable. From the administration side, they need to improve the RBAC model, as well as the clustering of this product. It will be good if we can start up the cluster, via IBM Connect Console. Some other products like MuleSoft, are providing this type of administration. MuleSoft is easy to use and user friendly."
"IBM App Connect should improve security features."
"A while ago, they were hacked, and it took them a very long time to open their website again in order to download any service packs or any features. I don't know what they could do differently. I know that they were vulnerable, and there was some downtime, but because they were down, we were unable to download any potential service packs."
"On the monitoring side of things, the UI for monitoring could be improved. It's a bit cumbersome to work with."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
"wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well."
"The market webMethods Integration Server falls under is a very crowded market, so for the product to stand out, Software AG would need to get traction in the open source community by releasing a new version or a base version and open source it, so people can create new custom components and add it to the portfolio."
"The patching of infrastructure is not very smooth and improved authentication should be added in the next feature."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM App Connect is ranked 11th in Cloud Data Integration with 20 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 60 reviews. IBM App Connect is rated 8.2, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM App Connect writes "Very flexible and user-friendly; embeds with other technologies; no dependency on queue manager". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". IBM App Connect is most compared with IBM Cloud Pak for Integration, Mule Anypoint Platform, IBM InfoSphere DataStage, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Informatica Cloud Data Integration, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with webMethods.io Integration, IBM Integration Bus, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Camunda. See our IBM App Connect vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration 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.