Anonymous UserAutomation Engineer at a computer software company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"This improved our organization, because it gives the management data to discuss for the next course of action and it suggests what to work on, as the next thing."
"It impresses me as a product because it never goes down. It always does what it is supposed to do."
"A big win for CA was the expertise of the local country support plus having support staff on site in a matter of hours, if required."
"It is helpful to have a central API that is hosted and managed."
"We loved the portal part the most, which had monetization and showed how people were using the stuff. It is a good product as a whole and has a lot of microservices and granular features."
"The solution fills our two most important concerns in seeking an API solution by providing a reliable gateway and security options."
"The mobile access gateway (MAG) is tremendous."
"When I have used technical support they helped me a lot. Sometimes they took a long time to respond because we had very complex issues that we asked them for help with, but I think it is a very good service."
"The ESB, the enterprise service bus is what we primarily use. In addition to that, the API management. These are the two tools which we have been using extensively. The enterprise platform."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to investigate APIs."
"Whenever there was an issue, the support was excellent."
"The most valuable features are API development and API management."
"One of the more valuable features is the stability of the platform."
"The documentation is great; it is always up to date and well-presented."
"The most important features are the API management and API development."
"The developer portal is easy to integrate. It is easy to use, easy to integrate, and I like the developer portal."
"From the last version, they have added more dashboard support, but there is still a lot they need to improve. In terms of monitoring, it's almost all covered. The interface can be improved, though."
"Some users say that the API lacks some features and is lagging behind the competition although that has not been my personal experience."
"The interface is Java which is difficult to make look very nice."
"The Portal lacks maturity. Since the move from Portal 3.x to 4.x, a lot of features were removed. It is slowly coming back. I can see a lot of changes are done in the "background" to decouple components and make it more flexible. Those changes are just not getting to the UI side quick enough."
"If they had different levels of support available then it would be easier to justify the costs."
"The delivery is bulky in terms of implementation. Its price could also be better. It is a very good product as compared to CA API, Google API, and WSO2 API, but its price is high. From the cloud-native perspective, some new features need to be added. It could also be made simpler to implement."
"The setup was not as straightforward as it should have been. Support should be improved."
"The architecture of the solution does not allow for flexibility in using different components for the gateway architecture."
"Rather than focusing on numbers, they should focus more on the customer support service."
"Better documentation to help explain each of the features would be really helpful."
"The pricing is quite expensive. It should be adjusted to make it more affordable for users."
"The most important thing that should be improved is that it is too heavy."
"Not many stand-out features."
"The initial setup is very complex."
"The API gateway and API runtime are too heavy, which means that it is not suitable for microservices."
"I would like to see more automation. Operations are done manually. It should also automate in the operation."
"At the time we bought the product it was a perpetual users license and there has been no need for additional licensing fees."
"There are some costs for maintenance that we are charged, but that seems fair because we get the support."
"Keep in mind the non-product licensing, e.g., if you opt not to use the embedded SQL."
"If you do a TCO of more than five years, then you will see a big jump in costs for some vendors."
"It is a pricey product, although not extremely overpriced compared to competitors in the market."
"It was very high at that time. We are a Broadcom CA partner, and we got it only for testing purposes. We didn't pay anything for it."
"This solution is a bit more expensive than competitors."
"I'm unsure about licensing costs because I'm not the person who handles this. But, ballpark, it's probably somewhere around $300,000-$400,000 or something like that."
"The licensing fees are approximately $80,000 USD per year and there are costs for additional functionality, as well as premiums for connectors to systems such as Oracle and SAP."
"The pricing is very expensive, although you get a lot of power from the product."
To compete successfully and thrive today, enterprises across every industry need to transform. This process is not just about incremental improvement, but about evolving core businesses to meet the demands of today’s connected world.
CA API Management accelerates this digital transformation by providing the capabilities you need to bring systems together, secure these integrations, deliver better customer experiences faster and capitalize on new opportunities.
Read more at http://www.ca.com/api
API Manager is a component of Anypoint Platform for designing, building, managing, and publishing APIs. Anypoint Platform uses Mule as its core runtime engine. You can use API Manager on a public cloud, such as CloudHub, a private cloud, or a hybrid. A hybrid deployment is an API deployed on a private server but having metadata processed in the public cloud.
Layer7 API Management is ranked 7th in API Management with 9 reviews while Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is ranked 3rd in API Management with 11 reviews. Layer7 API Management is rated 8.4, while Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Layer7 API Management writes "Serves to standardise routing messaging services into a single API view with multiple channels". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager writes "Good API management and an excellent enterprise platform". Layer7 API Management is most compared with Apigee, Amazon API Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, Kong Enterprise and IBM API Connect, whereas Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, Kong Enterprise and SwaggerHub. See our Layer7 API Management vs. Mulesoft Anypoint 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.