We performed a comparison between Tungsten RPA and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Kofax RPA is the simplicity of automating tasks."
"The features that we have found the most valuable are the integration of different third-party support and productivity services."
"The product provided all the security controls that we asked them."
"The most valuable feature is the robotic process."
"The ability to script information from websites is most valuable. It also seems to be fairly robust and reasonably easy to manage on a server-based deployment. We have a number of robots operating on the central server."
"The best part of Kofax is that they have a whole concept. It's one product, but also has extra elements that can be integrated."
"The product provides end-to-end solutions for different business problems."
"Kofax handles UIs via the browser well. If it's not possible, they have other features like modeling screen scrapes, etc."
"webMethods Integration Server is an easy-to-use solution and does not require a lot of coding."
"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 ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong."
"The tool supports gRPC."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is its reliability. It has a lot of great documentation from the service providers. Additionally, it is easy to use."
"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"One [of the most valuable features] is the webMethods Designer. That helps our developers develop on their own. It's very intuitive for design. It helps our developers to speed the development of services for the integrations."
"I'd like to see a recording function and a more simple interface."
"The product needs more AI capabilities."
"The solution could use some AI integrated features."
"The scalability has room for improvement."
"Automation with the latest websites is not effective. The support of newer websites developed using new technologies would improve this solution."
"Exception handling needs to be improved."
"This product has room for improvement in support of aviation. The interface could be improved in the next release."
"The product should improve desktop automation, which is hard to configure. It needs to have custom connectors. It is the only advantage that Microsoft Power Platform has over Kofax RPA. It has more than 800 custom connectors."
"It is quite expensive."
"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."
"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."
"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."
"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."
"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."
"We need more dashboards and reporting engines that can provide detailed information for management. In short, we need better analytics."
"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Tungsten RPA is ranked 12th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 24 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Tungsten RPA is rated 7.4, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Tungsten RPA writes "A stable product that provides end-to-end solutions for different business problems". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Tungsten RPA is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA) and SAS Data Management, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration. See our Tungsten RPA vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) 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.
