We performed a comparison between SAP Data Services and webMethods.io Integration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a powerful product with a broad range of features."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"The solution offers very good integration capabilities."
"The solution is easy to use since it's a graphical tool. It also requires only low-level coding."
"The logic is also simple. It makes it easy to build your extraction."
"Data Services' table comparison mechanism is very powerful. It's pretty hard to find a similar feature in other solutions."
"The most valuable features of SAP Data Services lie in its ability to effectively observe and interpret the information within data related to people or facts, stands out."
"The maintenance of data services is the solution's most valuable feature."
"There's hardware, software and application integration, providing hosting flexibility."
"I like the tool's scalability."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"It's easy to construct new interfaces like apps and client portals."
"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."
"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."
"In the future, Data Services should offer a cloud version."
"We encounter challenges while exporting implemented rules, such as those applied to objects like the material master, into a format like Excel for documentation and further analysis."
"The solution shows a lack of cloud support data services."
"At the integration level, there could be certain set of improvement to connect to various other systems."
"The solution should offer more machine learning and automation."
"The migration of the solution between different environments is quite complex."
"There needs to be multi-language support, however, my understanding is they are working on multi-language now."
"Source code control is another headache. When your source code base gets too large, managing the source code becomes cumbersome."
"It is difficult to maintain."
"The products, at the moment, are new and there should perhaps be support for the older version of the protocols."
"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."
"Rules engine processes and BPM processes should be improved."
"The solution's release management feature could be better."
"webMethods.io Integration's installation is complex. It should also improve integration and connectors."
SAP Data Services is ranked 10th in Data Integration with 45 reviews while webMethods.io Integration is ranked 22nd in Cloud Data Integration with 7 reviews. SAP Data Services is rated 8.0, while webMethods.io Integration is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of SAP Data Services writes "Responsive support, scalable, and beneficial integration". 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". SAP Data Services is most compared with Azure Data Factory, Syniti Data Quality, Informatica PowerCenter, SAP Process Orchestration and Palantir Foundry, whereas webMethods.io Integration is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, SAP Cloud Platform, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management and Microsoft Azure Logic Apps. See our SAP Data Services vs. webMethods.io Integration report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration 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.