Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs webMethods.io comparison

Axway and IBM are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. Axway is ranked #11 with an average rating of 7.8, while IBM is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.1. Axway holds a 4.0% mindshare in MFT, compared to IBM’s 2.0% mindshare. Additionally, 81% of Axway users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File ...

Read 9 Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer reviews

1,128 Views
753 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 92 webMethods.io reviews

449 Views
283 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File ...

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer and webMethods.io are competing in the data integration and management sector. While Axway's superior security and compliance options give it an edge for users focused on these aspects, webMethods.io’s integration capabilities and feature-rich environment often make it more appealing for those seeking functionality.

Features: Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer offers strong security features, extensive regulatory compliance support, and advanced file tracking capabilities. In comparison, webMethods.io excels in cloud integration, comprehensive API management, and flexible workflow automation.

Room for Improvement: Axway might benefit from enhancements in cloud-native functionality, broader integration options, and improved flexibility in workflows. Meanwhile, webMethods.io could improve by lowering complexity in certain integration processes, offering better pricing options, and enhancing its on-premise deployment capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer provides a straightforward deployment process with efficient customer service to aid in troubleshooting. webMethods.io has a cloud-native deployment model simplifying integration tasks and offers responsive customer service, although it is often lauded for a quicker setup and adaptability.

Pricing and ROI: Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer is acclaimed for its competitive setup cost and excellent ROI in security-focused sectors. webMethods.io, although considered a premium option, justifies its cost with comprehensive features and efficient data handling, often seen as valuable for businesses prioritizing advanced capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 849,190 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

"The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward."

"It provides a good amount of storage capacity for a reasonable price and has a good range of connectors."

"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’s very flexible."

"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."

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

"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."

"The product is very stable."

"The ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong."

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

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

"High throughput and excellent scalability."

"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."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a stable solution."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"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."

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

"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."

"It is complicated to manage multi-operations, particularly in handling file name changes within file transcripts."

"The initial setup was quite complex."

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

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

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

More Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer cons

"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."

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

"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."

"The products, at the moment, are new and there should perhaps be support for the older version of the protocols."

"The on-premises setup can be difficult."

"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."

"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."

"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

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

"Always plan five years ahead and don’t jeopardize the quality of your project by dropping items from the bill of materials."

"The product is expensive."

"There are no hidden costs in addition to the standard licensing fees for webMethods. For corporate organizations, it's a very cheap or fairly priced product, but for growing or small businesses, it's quite expensive. These businesses would probably need to consider an enterprise services bus at some point. Thus, from a pricing point, it closes out non-cooperate businesses."

"webMethods Integration Server is expensive, and there's no fixed price on it because it has a point pricing model. You can negotiate, which makes it interesting."

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

"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."

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

"Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client."

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

849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

29%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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 ...

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 Sterling File Gateway vs Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer

Compared 18% 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

GoAnywhere MFT 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

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 7% of the time

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% 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

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

April 2025

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer report

Download Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

March 2025

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

Buyer's Guide

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io

April 2025

Free Report: Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best Managed File Transfer (MFT) vendors and best Cloud Data Integration vendors.

We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.