We performed a comparison between TIBCO ActiveMatrix 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."For specific situations this can be a good solution and a simplified interface to work with."
"The capacity for distributing the jobs in a workflow is an important feature."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"The scheduling and the calendar are very useful."
"It is the best product because of its stability. ActiveMatrix 5.x is highly stable in production, and the downtime is very low. I have worked on a lot of service projects, and the engine is very stable, robust, and scalable. The development and change requests can be pushed quickly, and the mapper activity and SSLT kind of features are also good. It is easy to do changes, testing, and deployment. Its deployment is very easy, and we can automate a lot of scripts for our on-premises solution. I work for an investment bank, and we have automated a lot of processes for our customers. Previously, we used to develop scripts and tools. With version 6.x, everything is moved to Maven and other things. Environment handling is done mostly through DevOps tools. As compared to Mulesoft, the deployment and configuration are very easy in TIBCO."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"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."
"The synchronous and asynchronous messaging system the solution provides is very good."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"One [of the most valuable features] is the webMethods Designer. That helps our developers develop on their own. It's very intuitive for design. It helps our developers to speed the development of services for the integrations."
"How simple it is to create new solutions."
"Technical support needs to be streamlined."
"The product is missing some means of addressing more complex BPM constructs and should interface with more platforms easily."
"The scalability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"ActiveMatrix is in the middle field. MuleDB is more on the engineering side with Java and other things. SnapLogic is there are on the higher side with very low coding. TIBCO stays in the middle like IBM or Oracle. TIBCO can move towards IBM's way of doing. IBM has a big market and many varieties of products and good integration, which TIBCO doesn't have. It can have better integration. TIBCO's transition to the cloud is a little slow. As compared to Dell, Boomi, and Mulesoft. TIBCO took the steps a little later. TIBCO's ID was far better and easier to work with previously. TIBCO's 5.x ID was very good, and the development environment and the transition were easy. Version 6.5 onwards, it is a stable product, but it would be good if they can do something similar to version 5.4 with version 6. They should concentrate on this API market. It will give them the strength and the ability to grab the market back."
"The maintenance of the package could be improved."
"webMethods Integration Server needs to add more adapters."
"The interface needs some work. It is not very user-friendly."
"In terms of improvement, it would be better if it adapted quicker to open standards. It took a while for API specification before the last version was available. The spec of version two was rather quick."
"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."
"The logging capability has room for improvement. That way, we could keep a history of all the transactions. It would be helpful to be able to get to that without having to build a standalone solution to do so."
"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is ranked 31st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 6 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is rated 7.4, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM writes "A tool backed by stellar support that has helped me plan workflows easily". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". TIBCO ActiveMatrix BPM is most compared with Camunda, TIBCO iProcess Suite, Pega BPM, Appian and IBM BPM, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration. See our TIBCO ActiveMatrix 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.
