We performed a comparison between Informatica Cloud API and App Integration and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Apache, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."The interface is really good."
"The OAuth feature is the most valuable feature for authentication."
"The application integration will give you more flexibility when dealing with APIs."
"The interface has a great look and feel, and the functionality is so easy."
"The product is very stable."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"What I like best about webMethods Integration Server is its portfolio of connectors."
"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"Segregation of deployment for the environments is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."
"I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods."
"The pricing model is problematic."
"There's no direct way to connect to Amazon APIs from Informatica Cloud."
"The setup is complex."
"There could be a lot more application integration."
"In terms of improvement, it would be better if it adapted quicker to open standards. It took a while for API specification before the last version was available. The spec of version two was rather quick."
"The product must add more compatible connectors."
"The interface needs some work. It is not very user-friendly."
"We need more dashboards and reporting engines that can provide detailed information for management. In short, we need better analytics."
"This is a great solution and the vendor could improve the marketing of the solution to be able to reach more clients."
"I would like to see the price improve."
"The certifications and learning resources are not exposed openly enough. For instance, they have a trial version which comes with only a few basic features, and I think that community-wise they need to offer more free or open spaces where developers can feel encouraged to experiment."
"This product has too many gaps. You find them after update installations. This should be covered by automatic testing."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Informatica Cloud API and App Integration is ranked 18th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 4 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Informatica Cloud API and App Integration is rated 8.6, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Informatica Cloud API and App Integration writes " Provides data governance and offer good scalability, with a significant performance boost when moving from on-prem to the cloud". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Informatica Cloud API and App Integration is most compared with Apache Airflow, Pega BPM, Appian, ARIS Cloud and Camunda, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.