We compared WSO2 API Manager and Kong Enterprise based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
The setup process for WSO2 API Manager can vary in difficulty and complexity, taking approximately three months for full implementation. Some users found it straightforward, while others found it medium or difficult. Interactions with WSO2 could be improved according to some users. On the other hand, the installation process for Kong Enterprise was generally smooth and easy, with some users completing it within 15 to 20 minutes on average. Learning Lua script and seeking professional support were mentioned as challenges. Overall, the initial setup was considered reasonably easy and straightforward, taking a couple of weeks for some users.
WSO2 API Manager is highly regarded for its versatile authentication methods and extensive customization choices. It provides a user-friendly interface, thorough documentation, and exhibits stability and scalability. On the other hand, Kong Enterprise distinguishes itself with its network services based on plugins, robust authentication and authorization capabilities, and the ability to customize Lua scripts for observability.
The WSO2 API Manager has room for improvement in its user interface, user management system, security compliance, reverse proxy, multifactor authentication, and usability. Kong Enterprise, on the other hand, could improve its pricing, automatic data API creation, customization for integration, solutions for east-west communications and Zero Trust architecture, scaling up process, and developer portal with isolated data plans for federated teams.
The cost of setting up WSO2 API Manager can be expensive for users who need to run multiple instances and clusters. The specific cost is not provided, but it is stated to be less than 20,000 euros annually. In contrast, Kong Enterprise pricing is determined by factors like scale, licenses, and usage. While it is considered higher than comparable products, the licensing costs are reasonable.
The feedback regarding the customer service and support for WSO2 API Manager is varied, with certain customers expressing dissatisfaction. On the other hand, Kong Enterprise has garnered positive reviews for its customer service and support.
Comparison Results
In comparing WSO2 API Manager to Kong Enterprise, it is evident that they have distinct characteristics. WSO2 API Manager provides various authentication methods, ample customization choices, and a reliable, expandable platform. Nevertheless, it does have areas that need improvement, including an outdated user interface, intricate setup, and limited user management flexibility. Conversely, Kong Enterprise boasts a seamless installation process, valuable network services based on plugins, and commendable authentication and authorization features. Additionally, it receives praise for its customer service. However, it may necessitate learning Lua script and has room for enhancement in aspects such as pricing and customization.
"There are a few features that I like about Kong when it comes to authentication and authorization. Specifically, being able to use Kong for role-based access control (RBAC), and then further being able to integrate the RBAC mechanism with our enterprise directory, was very useful."
"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."
"The route limiting feature is very valuable."
"Kong Enterprise has excellent plugin support."
"Kong Enterprise comes with some ready plug-ins, which is very good for the customers."
"In our buying companies' perspective, it was easier to use compared to other platforms. The markets were pretty familiar with the solutions."
"The tool's scalability is good...The solution's technical support is good."
"API management lifecycle is the most valuable."
"The scalability is fine for our purposes."
"One of the great things about WSO2 API Manager is that it is so easy to adopt. And because it's an open source solution, we're able to extend the implementation any time to suit our company needs better."
"I think the best part about WSO2 API Manager is that it's highly customizable because it's open-source. The partnership model is quite lucrative for us, it helps us to go and pitch to our customers. You can build a lot of business models yourself that you want to use. You are able to do a lot of the solutions."
"It is possible to scale up and scale down with the solution...I can say that I have not seen any issues related to scalability."
"The solution is open-source."
"WSO2 API Manager has a user-friendly model."
"The solution is open source and easy to configure."
"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."
"Because it is open-source, it should be less expensive than others."
"The solution should include policy features that are available in other solutions like MuleSoft API manager but missing in Kong Enterprise."
"Kong Enterprise has decided not to support the web portal feature anymore, but I think that feature should stay in the on-premises solution."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Kong Enterprise can improve the customization to be able to do the integration properly."
"The price and the complexities attached to the solution are two areas of concern where improvements are required."
"They are developing another platform called Choreo that allows you to create API itself using the WSO2 programming language Ballerina. It would be great if they added a direct connection between Choreo and API Manager, that would be great. I think they are working on that, but I'm not sure."
"The technical support must be improved."
"We had some problems with the reverse proxy not being able to invoke fully qualified domain names, so we have to build some custom scripts to solve this issue."
"WSO2 API Manager could increase their security compliance."
"From a product perspective, the first thing is that although the documentation provided by WSO2 is good, it could be much better. We're in the middle of a complex migration, moving away from VMs to Kubernetes with the latest version of WSO2 and good documentation is essential to us right now."
"I can say that user management is not really flexible. So, if I want to create 1,000 store users, I can't do it as a publisher. You have to register as a store user using the store URL."
"From what I have experienced from the versions I have tried, they could improve on the multi-tenant environments to allow some kind of SSO single sign-on between tenant."
Kong Gateway Enterprise is ranked 6th in API Management with 18 reviews while WSO2 API Manager is ranked 7th in API Management with 33 reviews. Kong Gateway Enterprise is rated 7.8, while WSO2 API Manager is rated 8.0. 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 WSO2 API Manager writes "Reliable with good capabilities and good support". Kong Gateway Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Apache APISIX and Amazon API Gateway, whereas WSO2 API Manager is most compared with Apigee, Amazon API Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, Apache APISIX and 3scale API Management. See our Kong Gateway Enterprise vs. WSO2 API Manager 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.
