3scale API Management vs Tyk comparison

"The product is stable."

"To me, the most valuable feature of 3scale API Management is that it lets you add a backend to the product. I also like that you can integrate it well with OpenShift clusters, making 3scale API Management a useful solution."

"The most valuable features are the gateway and security features."

"The solution is quite lightweight, and the installation is very easy. It's like a two-click installation."

"I like the API automation."

"The gateway is the most valuable feature because it makes it possible for us to gather all traffic into one proxy, which is a good thing."

"The standard deployment is very simple."

"It's good that they aren't adding a lot of features like ESP, etc. It's okay with just being a gateway."

"The feature I find most valuable is that this solution allows us to manage our security."

"You can set up workflows and write limited pieces of logic."

"The scalability is very good. That was a key factor in the selection, like how it could be pushed to high volume and scalability, which seemed to be very good."

"The portal for developers that this solution provides has great functionality."

"The most valuable feature is the load balancing with the circuit-breaker function."

"It is a good product for API management."

"What I'd like to improve in 3scale API Management is its route-limiting feature. Currently, I don't know how to do that effectively on the solution, but in Kong, I know how to do it, so I would love to see route-limiting being easily done on 3scale API Management. It would also be good if there was some authentication that you could do from 3scale API Management because Kong offers that functionality out of the box. What I'd love to see in the next release of 3scale API Management is the ability to integrate more plug-ins easily onto the platform, so you'll be able to extend it, and even do customs management. If Red Hat could offer that extension where it allows the internal organization where 3scale API Management is deployed on-premise to integrate its tools on top of 3scale API Management and provide an API for that, that will make the solution very powerful."

"We tried to use the portal, but we decided that it wasn't enough. The content management system (CMS) is not easy to use if you want to customize things, and it's hard to get someone who has the knowledge to work with the CMS."

"The product is not that flexible for developers. It's less flexible and rigid. It's not easy to make changes or customize it."

"I believe the CMS part of it has room for improvement though. That is where you write a couple of things if you want to publish your API. It's based on liquid scripting, which doesn't seem like the obvious ones to script with."

"3scale API Management only supports restful APIs and doesn't support SOAP."

"It would be helpful to improve the customization features so that the customer can do it based on their own needs."

"What was suggested by Red Hat was a crucial part of the configuration, but when we started to ask about the supportability of this configuration, Red Hat said only some parts of the configuration would be supported."

"The user experience could be better. The developer portal is too complex and hard to configure."

"In terms of our usage, the main area of concern is that they tend to build enhancements slightly ahead of the considerations for what those enhancements and extensions are. So it could be slightly better communication with the customer base that would be my main issue with them."

"We would like a better tool for generating documentation for the APIs to be developed."

"We ran it for a while, but then we decided to move away from Tyk, because Tyk's cloud version, the SaaS version, has a significant limitation of limited flexibility, so you can't program very much."

"Sometimes when new features are released, they are not immediately stable."

"It is a young product and does not have the kind of brand recognition that would make it a more popular solution with our clients."

"I would like to see some additional features like having some extensions for .NET core because we use it for our back-end language."

"I don't think that 3scale is very expensive."

"The pricing is affordable, it's cheap."

"The cost was around $45,000 per year."

"3scale API Management has reasonable pricing, judging from its competitor, Kong. My organization pays yearly for the 3scale API Management license, though I'm unable to give the exact figure because every single day there are new clusters deployed. I'm in charge of three to four clusters in my team, but give or take, it costs a few thousand lakhs."

"There are different versions and plans available depending on the requirements, so there is flexibility in terms of the pricing."

"We are using the open-source version of this product, so there are no licensing costs for its use."

"The price is low compared to other products of a similar type."

"The cost curve is far smoother, both in terms of volume and the number of calls it's running on, compared to most competitors. So it's a tad more expensive at the very low end, but the curve is nothing like Apigee or some of the others."

"It had a free version, which suited many of our needs, but not all, but we were happy to go ahead with the licensed version as well, which is the paid version."