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

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File ...
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
10th
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), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (9th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer is 4.1%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

PradeepSingh1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Secure application with efficient features for file transfer management
We use the application to transfer and exchange data files between customers and vendors AMPLIFY has all the essential features for managing file transfer. Sometimes, the application's embedded databases couldn't perform well for a higher volume of data. Thus, legacy licensing for these…
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It’s very flexible."
"AMPLIFY has all the essential features for managing file transfer."
"The product is simple for encrypting data transfer of all the assets in our system."
"It makes a logical link between the inbound/outbound transfer, and makes it clearly visible. This is a very important feature for managing transfer with different environments, and it's very helpful in case of troubleshooting."
"It is an easy-to-use and stable product."
"Axway consolidated all of our communications into one platform, simplifying network and port management. Now, all we have to do is open one port to this application, and we can remove all the firewall rules on that port. It's much more straightforward to manage from a security perspective. We used to rely on an archaic FTP solution, but Axway features SFTP, so it was an improvement security-wise."
"It provides a good amount of storage capacity for a reasonable price and has a good range of connectors."
"The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward."
"When it comes to the user interface, I'm already really used to it. I cannot say anything against it. For me, it's easy to use."
"The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation."
"webMethods Trading Networks is a stable solution."
"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."
"The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved."
"The performance is good."
 

Cons

"Their monitoring is not up to the mark and needs improvement."
"One area of improvement is troubleshooting. When a transfer fails, they provide little information about the login, which makes troubleshooting difficult. Also, file transfer scheduling is primitive. By that, I mean you can't define a complex schedule, like scheduling a job to run at particular hours multiple times in a day."
"The tool can try to make it a little bit more flexible so that we can easily invoke the APIs, and in such a way, it can be made a little bit better."
"It is complicated to manage multi-operations, particularly in handling file name changes within file transcripts."
"We only hope that they continue to keep updating the solution and improving the offering. They could always do more updates and releases."
"Sometimes, the application's embedded databases couldn't perform well for a higher volume of data."
"The areas in need of improvement are the monitoring and the cut-off management, when needed. Today you have at least two solutions: Buy the other Axway suite, Sentinel, or integrate it into your monitoring system."
"The initial setup was quite complex."
"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."
"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."
"It is difficult to maintain."
"We need more dashboards and reporting engines that can provide detailed information for management. In short, we need better analytics."
"The price has room for improvement."
"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."
"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."
"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AMPLIFY's license is a one-time investment."
"The platform's price aligns with the market."
"It is quite expensive, and because of that, we get good service from them in return for the price paid."
"Pricing and licensing is related to the protocols you choose to support."
"It's a good deal for the money that we pay."
"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."
"There is a license needed to use the webMethods Integration Server."
"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."
"I would like to see better pricing for the license."
"Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client."
"It is worth the cost."
"It is expensive, but we reached a good agreement with the company. It is still a little bit expensive, but we got a better deal than the previous one."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer?
The product is simple for encrypting data transfer of all the assets in our system.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer?
There's infinite pricing available on their portal, however, it's typically accompanied by a discount. However, detailed pricing information is confidential and was not shared in this call.
What needs improvement with Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer?
Their monitoring is not up to the mark and needs improvement. They should have enhanced auto-reconnection capabilities for interrupted file transfers and implement features allowing chunk movement ...
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.
 

Also Known As

SecureTransport, Axway SecureTransport, AMPLIFY MFT
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BNP Paribas Securities Services, Bollor_, E.ON AG Group, BMW Group, IdenTrust, Gassco, International Post Corporation, SNCF, DB Schenker Logistics, Logius, CSCA, La Poste
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.