We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure API Management and Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager seems to be the more desirable product. With overwhelming responses applauding its stability and reliability, it is evident that users of Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager are happy with the solution. In addition, users had only positive experiences with service and support, and were satisfied with the ROI. Users consider it to be expensive, but worth the expense.
"I have found this solution to be easy to configure, simple to use, and flexible."
"The package as a whole is useful for our customers."
"Monitoring: It gives us a detailed overview of how clients are using the API and it allows us to see the consumption trends in real-time."
"I like the support they provide for the APIs more than the solution itself. First of all, documentation-wise, both Microsoft Azure and even Google Cloud are up there. But in comparison, the real-time consulting and support for APIs make Microsoft stand out a little. I also like the performance. Standard public cloud provider-built APIs are more resilient and flexible in terms of what feature you want to use and what feature you don't want to use, and they're more customizable. They are more resilient in terms of performance in that particular environment because that is the design aspect of the offering. When public clouds build APIs and deploy them after testing them on their framework for a certain amount of time, I feel there is a massive difference in the product's performance. On the interface, everything is strong."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the integration of CI/CD with the API gateway."
"Azure APIM's best features are its straightforward access management (it's a single point of access for all monitoring and logging and for policy implementation) and its integration with the Azure Cloud infrastructure."
"The Application Gateway we have found to be the most useful in Microsoft Azure API Management. We have integrated the Microsoft Azure API Management with Application Gateway. Application Gateway is a type of load balancer that we are using for the high availability of our API calls."
"Azure API is scalable."
"The product improved data exchange processes by enhancing communication between various messaging queues. There was a heavy reliance on queues for indexing clusters and data transfer in this particular environment. The product facilitated the transfer of messages from one queue to another, ensuring data flow and processing across different topics."
"Overall, the platform is pretty good, I cannot say which one specific feature is good. The idea of an API manager is really interesting."
"We have all the policies available via drag and drop. It made it very easy."
"MuleSoft has given the API solution a 3-tiered architecture. This means that there are multiple channels available in one application. The usability is very high."
"Both the cloud and on-premises options are available. Customers can leverage the MuleSoft Cloud platform to deploy the applications or set up their own online infrastructure to deploy applications."
"We can use both on-premises and cloud setups."
"Whenever there was an issue, the support was excellent."
"The most valuable features of Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager are the API gateway, rate limiting, and orchestration."
"The licensing fees should be cheaper."
"It would be better if it were easier to transition to Azure from JIRA. For example, different nomenclature must be performed when you shift to Azure from JIRA. JIRA's storage, tasks, and ethics are treated differently from Azure. Here they might become functions, which is not an option in JIRA because that nomenclature difference is there. If someone has to get into the nomenclature, then there can be different tasks from clients, and here, they may be treated as functions. JIRA has sub-tasks, but sub-tasks don't exist in Azure. The nomenclature and the linking between ethics and a function and a story are different, and people may have to learn to adapt to the new nomenclature."
"Microsoft Azure API Management could improve the documentation. The documentation feels like marketing information and not sufficient technical information. Your easiest option is to purchase services from a Microsoft partner and this is their marketing."
"API Management's price could be lower."
"Sometimes when immediate support is required, it isn't available."
"The scalability of this solution could be improved. The volume which the API Management task service can handle needs to be improved. Cost wise, this solution could be optimized."
"Microsoft Azure API Management should have the ability to allow multitenancy."
"When you start with Azure API management, you also need to onboard the Azure console and the Azure cloud environment, which comes with a price."
"Their analytics needs a lot of improvement. It's really lacking right now."
"The pricing is quite expensive. It should be adjusted to make it more affordable for users."
"They should provide training and development programs to enable the skills and capabilities of users."
"Since most components are situated in the cloud, there's one particular hosted in the cloud. This presents a considerable challenge. While all other components are implemented on-premises, this specific one isn't permitted to be hosted in the cloud as per customer requirements. Shifting this component to an on-premises environment requires a significant effort."
"Licensing costs should be reduced, it's quite expensive."
"We find that the enterprise level is lacking scalability."
"An area for improvement in MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager is the process of applying policies because it's manual. It would be great if MuleSoft could make the process easier, particularly by automating it."
"Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager can improve some of the gateway features. We could use some more customization in creating rules. A lot of the policies are related to the APIs rather than the client. If I want to apply a policy based on a client that is not available."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 68 reviews while MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager is ranked 4th in API Management with 47 reviews. Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8, while MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager writes "Responsive technical support, low tickets issued showing great stability, and limitless expansion". Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, Kong Gateway Enterprise, IBM API Connect and WSO2 API Manager, whereas MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, IBM API Connect, Kong Gateway Enterprise and Layer7 API Management. See our Microsoft Azure 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.