We performed a comparison between Kong Gateway Enterprise and webMethods.io 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."The route limiting feature is very valuable."
"We use the solution for load-balancing, caching, and rate-limiting APIs."
"This is a solid intrusion prevention system that combines a firewall and antivirus in a single solution."
"Kong Enterprise comes with some ready plug-ins, which is very good for the customers."
"The solution provides good performance."
"The most valuable feature of Kong Enterprise is its capability to integrate with various security tools."
"Protocol transformation is the most valuable feature of Kong Enterprise."
"It boasts remarkable speed and stability, and these qualities, particularly the gateway's resilience, are standout features for me."
"There's hardware, software and application integration, providing hosting flexibility."
"It's easy to construct new interfaces like apps and client portals."
"I like the tool's scalability."
"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."
"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."
"The solution is scalable."
"The connectivity that the tool provides, along with the functionalities needed for our company's business, are some of the beneficial aspects of the product."
"Kong Enterprise can improve the customization to be able to do the integration properly."
"The technical support team's response time needs to be improved."
"Kong Enterprise fails to provide live tracing of the APIs, which is possible nowadays."
"We would like to see an automatic data API when we have a table in the database."
"Kong Enterprise needs to improve its pricing, which starts at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Pricing should be based on API usage rather than monthly. It should improve its documentation as well."
"The OS upgrades are not as frequent as they should be and they are bulky."
"There should be an easier way to integrate with other solutions, even though it's the same API solution layer. Comparability will be a good improvement."
"The solution should include policy features that are available in other solutions like MuleSoft API manager but missing in Kong Enterprise."
"The solution's release management feature could be better."
"The products, at the moment, are new and there should perhaps be support for the older version of the protocols."
"webMethods.io Integration's installation is complex. It should also improve integration and connectors."
"Rules engine processes and BPM processes should be improved."
"It is difficult to maintain."
"The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
Kong Gateway Enterprise is ranked 6th in API Management with 18 reviews while webMethods.io Integration is ranked 29th in API Management with 7 reviews. Kong Gateway Enterprise is rated 7.8, while webMethods.io Integration is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Kong Gateway Enterprise writes "Provides role-based access control and can be easily customized with Lua script". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods.io Integration writes "Though the tool provides great connectivity functionality, it needs to be made more stable". Kong Gateway Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, WSO2 API Manager, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Apache APISIX, whereas webMethods.io Integration is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, SAP Cloud Platform, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management and Layer7 API Management. See our Kong Gateway Enterprise vs. webMethods.io 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.