We performed a comparison between Oracle BPM and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Our company is based around Oracle processes. It provides a lot of flexibility in its processes."
"We selected this solution not only for the BPM but for the entire package."
"We have more than 800 distinct applications in our IT landscape. We had enough scalability and okay development cycles, and it has been enough to cover our backup operations and order management systems."
"The default Workspace does not meet all our needs and sometimes you need to create your own custom Workspace."
"The support is good."
"The Workspace is a full, rich application where most users can find what they want. It shows them a list of their work."
"It has developmental accelerators, which allow for virtually any customization needs which you may require."
"The solution provides extensive functionalities."
"Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations."
"A product with good API and EDI components."
"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."
"The product is very stable."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods."
"Given that you have one integration API in place, it takes very minimal effort to scale it to any other application that might want to use the same. Its flow-based development environment is a breeze and makes it really easy to re-use most of the existing components and build up a new API."
"We have had some issues with version migration, from one version of processes to another. We would have to call Oracle Services but on a day to day, we didn't have any issues."
"Pricing is an area that could use improvement."
"Every time we roll out a new version of processes, we have to migrate to a new process. The process of this migration was not very smooth. We later decided that it would be easier for us to stop all processes, deploy a new version and then restart."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"You have to maintain it manually."
"Overall, the engine and the UI both have to be made lighter."
"From my knowledge of this solution, I don't see that the Oracle BPM includes features such as the growth of discovery and process mining."
"The time it takes to get from deployment to production could be faster."
"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."
"I would like to see the price improve."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well."
"The orchestration is not as good as it should be."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
"Version control is not very easy. The packages and the integration server are on Eclipse IDE, but you can't compare the code from the IDE. For example, if you are working on Java code, doing version control and deployment for a quick comparison between the code isn't easy. Some tools or plug-ins are there, such as CrossVista, and you can also play with an SVN server where you have to place your package, and from there, you can check, but you have to do that as a separate exercise. You can't do it from the IDE or webMethods server. You can't just right-click and upload your service."
"This product has too many gaps. You find them after update installations. This should be covered by automatic testing."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Oracle BPM is ranked 14th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 22 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Oracle BPM is rated 7.4, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Oracle BPM writes "Stable, has a lot of features and out-of-the-box integrations, but it's heavy, and the technical support isn't good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Oracle BPM is most compared with Camunda, SAP Signavio Process Manager, IBM BPM, AWS Step Functions and Apache Airflow, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration. See our Oracle BPM vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.
