Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apigee vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.2
Apigee boosts ROI by streamlining API management, enabling monetization, enhancing security, and ensuring policy compliance despite cost concerns.
Sentiment score
7.1
Automating tasks reduced expenses, downtime, and labor needs, with significant time savings and positive returns outperforming competitors.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.3
Apigee's customer service is mixed, praised for responsiveness but criticized for slow responses, with larger clients seemingly prioritized.
Sentiment score
6.6
webMethods.io's customer service is responsive and helpful but occasionally slow for complex issues, with some variability in experiences.
They are responsive and provide assistance even during production issues.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Apigee is highly scalable, integrating with Kubernetes for seamless traffic handling, though careful cost management is sometimes needed.
Sentiment score
7.2
webMethods.io offers scalable solutions with easy cluster additions and CPU enhancements, though some challenges in connectors and on-premise setups exist.
Adding extra Cassandra databases is complex.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
Apigee is a stable and reliable platform, highly rated for performance, security, and integration in complex environments.
Sentiment score
7.7
webMethods.io is praised for its stability, reliability, and performance, with minimal downtime and effective long-term integration.
Apigee is stable, and we have had the system running on Apigee servers for more than four years without any stability issues.
 

Room For Improvement

Apigee needs enhancements in access management, integration, documentation, pricing, and support for SOAP services and hybrid deployments.
webMethods.io needs improved support, scalability, affordability, UI, logging, monitoring, version control, AI integration, and simplified processes.
Apigee only allows validation of transactions up to a four-hour period, which requires manual hovering over the date and time.
Analytics is one of the areas needing enhancement, specifically more visibility and control over traffic to improve capacity management and high availability.
 

Setup Cost

Apigee, expensive yet feature-rich, suits medium to large enterprises with varied pricing based on deployment and API usage.
webMethods.io is seen as expensive but offers flexible licensing, making it suitable for larger businesses but costly for small firms.
Apigee is perceived as slightly costly compared to other tools in the market.
Apigee is high-priced, suitable for large enterprises where the benefit aligns with the cost.
 

Valuable Features

Apigee offers API management, analytics, security, monetization, scalability, and a developer portal for documentation and integration features.
webMethods.io features efficient design, robust EDI, versatile integration, strong security, and flexible event-driven architecture for diverse applications.
The features for API security have been significant with Apigee.
 

Categories and Ranking

Apigee
Ranking in API Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
86
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (6th)
webMethods.io
Ranking in API Management
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (4th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), Cloud Data Integration (8th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Featured Reviews

ShawkyFoda  - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides high visibility and control with good traffic monitoring
Analytics is one of the areas needing enhancement, specifically more visibility and control over traffic to improve capacity management and high availability. The replication process between Master and Slave for disaster recovery takes too long. Dependencies on analytics impact the performance of the user interface, which should be separate. The complex setup process on-premises, especially with multi-node installations, could also be improved. Additional control in product declarations, based on operations like POST and GET, is needed.
Michele Illiano - PeerSpot reviewer
Can function as an ESB along with the core product, with decent integration of message protocols
I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance. This is why, for most customers who have to deal with big files, I suggest that they use a product other than ActiveTransfer. I would like to note that this problem mainly concerns large files that undergo extra operations, such assigning, unassigning, or file translation. When these operations take place on large files, ActiveTransfer will use up a lot of resources. Within the product itself, I also believe that there is room for improvement in terms of optimization when it comes to general performance. I suspect that the issues underlying poor optimization are because it is all developed in Java. That is, all the objects and functions that are used need to be better organized, especially when it comes to big files but also overall. webMethods ActiveTransfer was born as an ESB to handle messages, and these messages were typically very short, i.e. small in size. A message is data that you have to send to an application, where it must be received in real-time and possibly processed or acknowledged elsewhere in the system as well. So, because it was initially designed for small messages, it struggles with performance when presented with very large files. All this to say, I suggest that they have an engineer reevaluate the architecture of the product in order to consider cases where large files are sent, and not only small ones. As for new features, compared to other products in the market, I think Software AG should be more up to date when it comes to extra protocol support, especially those protocols that other solutions have included in their products by default. Whenever we need to add an unsupported protocol, we have to go through the effort of custom development in order to work with it. Also, all the banks are obligated to migrate to the new standards, and big companies are all handling translations and operating their libraries with the new protocol formats. But webMethods ActiveTransfer doesn't seem to be keeping up with this evolution. Thus, they should aim to be more compliant in future, along the lines of their competitors such as IBM and Primeur.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Apigee differ from Azure API Management?
Apigee offers both cloud-based and on-prem options while Microsoft Azure API Management currently only offers a cloud-based solution. Both solutions are easy to use. Apigee allows for the ability...
Which is better - Apigee or Amazon API Gateway?
Amazon API Gateway is a platform that supports the creation and publication of API for web applications. The platform can support thousands of simultaneous API calls, and it provides monitoring, ma...
What do you like most about Built.io Flow?
The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them.
What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Adobe, advance.net, Amadeus, AT&T, Bechtel, Belly, Burberry, Chegg, Citrix, Dell, eBay, Equifax, GameStop, First Data, Globe, HCSC, Intralinks, Kao, Meredith, Mitchell, Orange, Pearson
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Apigee vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.