We performed a comparison between webMethods API Gateway and webMethods.io API based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
"In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."
"The performance is good."
"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."
"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."
"The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."
"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."
"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
"In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate consumption plans and throttle all those consumption plans towards the run time could be better."
"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."
"A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility."
webMethods API Gateway is ranked 12th in API Management with 9 reviews while webMethods.io API is ranked 30th in API Management with 2 reviews. webMethods API Gateway is rated 8.0, while webMethods.io API is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of webMethods API Gateway writes "We developed several services in the cloud using a sandbox environment for our last hackathon". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods.io API writes "Offers a strategic toolset for gradual integration advancement". webMethods API Gateway is most compared with Apigee, webMethods.io Integration, Kong Gateway Enterprise, webMethods Microgateway and CentraSite, whereas webMethods.io API is most compared with Apigee and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager. See our webMethods API Gateway vs. webMethods.io API 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.
