We performed a comparison between Amazon API Gateway and webMethods.io Integration 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."It's flexible. It was valuable."
"The solution is solid, robust, and scalable."
"One of the most valuable aspects of API Gateway is its native integration with AWS services."
"Amazon API Gateway can integrate with ECS and Lambda."
"It provides the flexibility to configure, switch, and manage configurations through cloud permissions or performance settings."
"Its security feature is the most valuable because it is mainly a security solution. It has easy authentication and authorization, and its integration is also useful."
"t is easy for integrations if it is deployed in AWS Services."
"Amazon stack is easy to use in combination with other Amazon services, so it was a logical continuity."
"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"I like the tool's scalability."
"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."
"It's easy to construct new interfaces like apps and client portals."
"There's hardware, software and application integration, providing hosting flexibility."
"I believe that there could be more features associated with analytics since it is an area where the product lacks."
"The user interface, in general, can be better. The user interface for the entire Amazon cloud can be more friendly. There are some scenarios that are not really easy to manage and configure through the user interface."
"Amazon API Gateway is not as complete as Apigee and needs to be improved by adding more features to become a more robust application."
"I believe better governance and monitoring features would be beneficial."
"The integration could be improved."
"We would like to see more UI-based monitoring."
"The user interface could be improved, as well as customer support and having a local customer representative in a country."
"There are certain restrictions that cannot be implemented without web access."
"The products, at the moment, are new and there should perhaps be support for the older version of the protocols."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
"The solution's release management feature could be better."
"webMethods.io Integration's installation is complex. It should also improve integration and connectors."
"Rules engine processes and BPM processes should be improved."
"The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It is difficult to maintain."
Amazon API Gateway is ranked 3rd in API Management with 37 reviews while webMethods.io Integration is ranked 29th in API Management with 7 reviews. Amazon API Gateway is rated 8.2, while webMethods.io Integration is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Amazon API Gateway writes "Easy initial setup and highly stable solution". 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". Amazon API Gateway is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Apigee, WSO2 API Manager and Kong Gateway Enterprise, whereas webMethods.io Integration is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, SAP Cloud Platform, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management and StreamSets. See our Amazon API Gateway vs. webMethods.io Integration 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.