Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs webMethods.io comparison

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io

Download the complete report

Helped 842,767 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

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File ...

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

11th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

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

Ranking in other categories

Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer is 4.0%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

Featured Reviews

PradeepSingh1

Director Of Operations at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees

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…

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

"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."

"It’s very flexible."

"AMPLIFY has all the essential features for managing file transfer."

"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 is an easy-to-use and stable product."

"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."

"The product is simple for encrypting data transfer of all the assets in our system."

"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."

"A product with good API and EDI components."

"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."

"ActiveTransfer lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it. After that, we can remove the file to make sure that the reconciliation process is done. Sometimes we will zip and unzip the files, but if we have a GKB file, we often ignore it."

"We have found the pricing of the solution to be fair."

"EDI is robust and integration with SAP is good."

"Segregation of deployment for the environments is the most valuable feature of the solution."

"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."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"The initial setup was quite complex."

"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."

"Sometimes, the application's embedded databases couldn't perform well for a higher volume of data."

"Improvement in Data Encoding would be very appreciated (I'm thinking of ASCII-EBCDIC, ASCII-ASCII, etc.)."

"We only hope that they continue to keep updating the solution and improving the offering. They could always do more updates and releases."

"Their monitoring is not up to the mark and needs improvement."

"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."

"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."

More Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer cons

"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."

"We'd like for them to open up to a more cloud-based solution that could offer more flexibility and maybe a better rules engine or more integration with rules engines."

"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."

"The product must add more compatible connectors."

"The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution."

"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."

"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."

"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The platform's price aligns with the market."

"Pricing and licensing is related to the protocols you choose to support."

"It is quite expensive, and because of that, we get good service from them in return for the price paid."

"AMPLIFY's license is a one-time investment."

"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."

"I am not involved in the licensing side of things."

"Sometimes we don't have a very clear idea what the licensing will entail at first, because it can be very customizable. On one hand, this can be a good thing, because it can be tailored to a specific customer's needs. But on the other hand it can also be an issue when some customer asks, "What's the cost?" and we can't yet give them an accurate answer."

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

"webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them."

"I signed a three-year deal with them. It is a yearly locked-in price for the next three years."

"It is worth the cost."

"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

842,767 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

29%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Retailer

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.

IBM Sterling File Gateway vs Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer

Comparisons

Compared 17% of the time

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer

Compared 16% of the time

MOVEit vs Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer

Compared 15% of the time

JSCAPE by Redwood vs Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer

Compared 15% of the time

BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer vs Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer

Compared 15% of the time

More Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer Competitors

IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

Download Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer product report

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer report

webMethods.io

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

SecureTransport, Axway SecureTransport, AMPLIFY MFT

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

Overview

As a multi-protocol MFT gateway, Axway SecureTransport provides the flexibility you need to support virtually any MFT use case. Secure, manage, and track file flows among people and applications inside your enterprise, and beyond your firewall to your user communities, mobile devices, and the cloud. Perform high-volume automated file transfers between systems, sites, lines of business and external partners, to user-driven communications and mobile, folder- and portal-based file sharing.

Axway

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

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

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io