Aurea CX Messenger vs webMethods.io comparison

Aurea and IBM are both solutions in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category. Aurea is ranked #12 with an average rating of 9.0, while IBM is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2. Aurea holds a 0.6% mindshare in E, compared to IBM’s 10.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Aurea users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Aurea CX Messenger

Read 7 Aurea CX Messenger reviews

248 Views
84 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 92 webMethods.io reviews

2,234 Views
1,585 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Aurea CX Messenger

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

Aurea CX Messenger and webMethods.io are prominent competitors in the integration platform field. While Aurea CX Messenger excels in pricing and support services, webMethods.io is seen as superior due to its robust features, making it a preferred choice despite higher costs.

Features: Aurea CX Messenger is recognized for its reliable message queuing, robust security, and scalability. It uses well-known technologies like XSLT and JavaScript to simplify development. webMethods.io offers broad integration options, agility in hybrid and cloud environments, and comprehensive connectors, making it versatile and powerful for various integration needs.

Room for Improvement: Aurea CX Messenger could enhance its versatility to match webMethods.io's broad integration capabilities and update its cloud-native deployment flexibility. Further developing its hybrid environment agility might help it compete better. On the other hand, webMethods.io could benefit from improvements in pricing structure to offer more cost-effective solutions for users and enhancing some specialized modules to match their core integration reliability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Aurea CX Messenger provides straightforward on-premise deployment with strong support services, ensuring quick issue resolution. webMethods.io emphasizes a smooth and flexible cloud-native deployment with support for multiple environments, offering comprehensive onboarding for enhanced ease and adaptability.

Pricing and ROI: Aurea CX Messenger is appreciated for its cost-efficiency, promising a high ROI through affordability and lower ongoing costs. webMethods.io, though more expensive upfront, offers significant ROI by enhancing business integrations over time. Its long-term value and transformative capabilities often justify the initial investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 841,004 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Aurea CX Messenger

Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

12th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Activity Monitoring (3rd), Message Queue (MQ) Software (9th), SOA Governance (3rd), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (7th)

webMethods.io

Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 10.5%, up from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Featured Reviews

Radhey Rajput

Sr. IT Analyst at NCR Corporation

Lightweight and efficient solution

It's very good and lightweight. But, it does not provide web service communication. But it is excellent for internal connections One valuable feature is the messaging broker. If there is a disruption, it restores the messages. And when the application is running, it delivers all the messages. The…

Read full review

Michele Illiano

Head of Division at Innovery

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."

"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."

"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."

"The solution offers excellent stability."

"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."

"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."

"The developer portal is a valuable feature."

"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."

"The most valuable feature of webMethods Integration Server is all the capabilities it provides. We leverage most of the features, that they have offered to us. Our vendor has made some additional features on top of the webMethods Integration Server and we use all the features together."

"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."

"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."

"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."

"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."

"With webMethods, the creation of servers and the utilization of Trading Networks facilitate B2B integration. It resolves any related issues effectively."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"

"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."

"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."

"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."

"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."

"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."

"It would be nice if they had a change management system offering. We built our own deployer application because the one built into webMethods couldn't enforce change management rules. Integration into a change management system, along with the version control system, would be a good offering; it's something that they're lacking."

"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."

"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"

"As webMethods Integration Server is expensive, that's its area for improvement."

"We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable."

"A while ago, they were hacked, and it took them a very long time to open their website again in order to download any service packs or any features. I don't know what they could do differently. I know that they were vulnerable, and there was some downtime, but because they were down, we were unable to download any potential service packs."

"Perhaps in the area of Microservices, where I think Trading Networks could benefit from some improvements."

"The certifications and learning resources are not exposed openly enough. For instance, they have a trial version which comes with only a few basic features, and I think that community-wise they need to offer more free or open spaces where developers can feel encouraged to experiment."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is not so high."

"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."

"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"

"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."

"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."

"The price is high and I give it a five out of ten."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."

"webMethods.io Integration's pricing is high and has yearly subscription costs."

"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."

"There is a license needed to use the webMethods Integration Server."

"It's a good deal for the money that we pay."

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

17%

Insurance Company

Media Company

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Aurea CX Messenger?

The Messenger Broker is a really good feature.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aurea CX Messenger?

The pricing is not so high. I will rate it a seven out of ten, where one is the lowest and ten is the highest. There are no additional fees to the standard license.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Aurea CX Messenger?

The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services because the earlier version is not using web service and cloud functionality. If Aurea could include these features in the fut...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?

webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM MQ vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 54% of the time

TIBCO eFTL vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 46% of the time

More Aurea CX Messenger Competitors

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

Mule ESB vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Business Activity Monitoring

February 2025

Download Aurea CX Messenger product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

February 2025

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQ

Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API

Overview

CX Messenger lets your technology keep pace with your business. Aurea’s industry leading Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) lets you adapt and change your infrastructure with plug-and-play speed and ease.

Aurea

webMethods.io Integration is a powerful integration platform as a service (iPaaS) that provides a combination of capabilities offered by ESBs, data integration systems, API management tools, and B2B gateways.

IBM

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage

Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io

March 2025

Free Report: Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors and best Cloud Data Integration vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.