We performed a comparison between Kong Gateway Enterprise and webMethods API Portal based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Google, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in API Management."The features I like include ease of operation and implementation in a cloud environment, the dashboarding features for API statistics, and the user-friendly developer portal."
"I like everything about it. It provides the security we need."
"The tool's scalability is good...The solution's technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it seamlessly supports a vast number of tools."
"Good at intercepting traffic and modeling APIs around that."
"The route limiting feature is very valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Kong Enterprise is its capability to integrate with various security tools."
"The tool's feature that I find most beneficial is rate limiting. In our usage, especially in the financial sector, we prioritize limiting API usage. This is crucial because we provide APIs to other companies and must ensure they adhere to their allocated usage limits. Without rate limiting, there's a risk of excessive usage, which could result in significant costs."
"It is good for communicating between the systems and for publishing and subscribing. We can easily retrieve data. It is good in terms of troubleshooting and other things."
"We have found the pricing of the solution to be fair."
"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."
"Kong Enterprise can improve the customization to be able to do the integration properly."
"The OS upgrades are not as frequent as they should be and they are bulky."
"The solution should include policy features that are available in other solutions like MuleSoft API manager but missing in Kong Enterprise."
"We are facing issues with the solution's features like reports and traffic analysis."
"Because it is open-source, it should be less expensive than others."
"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 ease of billing is lost when Kong is not available directly on the Azure marketplace. This is one area where they can improve."
"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."
"Some of the things that we use cannot be done in this solution. For these things, we have to either use a Java service or a util service. There is no predefined or existing service that we can use. So, we have to work on the util service and write on top of it. Its price can also be better. It is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."
"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"
"The on-premises setup can be difficult."
Kong Gateway Enterprise is ranked 6th in API Management with 19 reviews while webMethods API Portal is ranked 23rd in API Management with 3 reviews. Kong Gateway Enterprise is rated 7.8, while webMethods API Portal is rated 7.6. 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 API Portal writes "Stable, with good technical support, but the on-premises version can be difficult to set up". Kong Gateway Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, WSO2 API Manager, Apigee, Apache APISIX and Layer7 API Management, whereas webMethods API Portal is most compared with IBM API Connect and Microsoft Azure API Management.
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.