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

Coralogix 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Coralogix
Ranking in API Management
29th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (33rd), Log Management (39th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (42nd), Streaming Analytics (19th), Anomaly Detection Tools (1st)
webMethods.io
Ranking in API Management
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Coralogix is 0.1%, down from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.1%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1915599 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good capabilities, has a helpful interface and is straightforward to set up
We have asked for a couple of features from the company already. What typically happens is a lot of people - and developers are one of the biggest consumers of this product - go to this product to optimize their investigation process and specific configurations. That increases our data flow at times, so the cost changes. And a lot of changes happen due to that. We have asked the company to auto-revert the changes after a while so that the system works typically. We want it to work at what it is expected to work at and not really based on the updated configuration which one developer has decided to change.
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

"For now, we have not experienced any stability issues."
"A non-tech person can easily get used to it."
"The solution offers very good convenience filtering."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The solution is easy to use and to start with."
"The log monitoring is good, and the dashboards that we create are beneficial."
"Coralogix scales well, and I will rate it nine out of ten."
"The best feature of this solution allows us to correlate logs, metrics and traces."
"It's a visual tool, so our transformations can be quickly implemented without a lot of fuss. The fact that we have an easy way to expose REST services is also very interesting. It offers the possibility to connect over GMS to synchronize message brokers."
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."
"Within the new version, webMethods API Gateway gives us an end-to-end lifecycle from the creation of the API up into the development, deployment, and promotion into production/live. The current end-to-end lifecycle of the API gives us enough authority and governance of the API. We know what are currently live services, what is in the testing stage of development, and what version that has been commissioned. So, the full life cycle itself gives us full authority and governance of the API."
"The synchronous and asynchronous messaging system the solution provides is very good."
"The messaging part is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"A product with good API and EDI components."
 

Cons

"The user interface could be more intuitive and explanatory."
"It would be helpful if Coralogix could integrate the main modules that any organization requires into a single subscription."
"From my experience, Coralogix has horrible Terraform providers."
"The documentation of the tool could be improved"
"Coralogix should have some AI capabilities to auto-detect anomalies and provide suggestions. The increasing volume of data and the resulting bandwidth charges are concerns."
"The user interface is not intuitive, especially when first onboarding, and improvements could be made here."
"Coralogix should have some AI capabilities to auto-detect anomalies and provide suggestions."
"We want it to work at what it is expected to work at and not really based on the updated configuration which one developer has decided to change."
"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 price has room for improvement."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
"We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable."
"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."
"For code version control, you need to use some external software."
"The solution should include REST API calls."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of the solution is per volume of data ingested."
"Currently, we are at a very minimal cost, which is around $400 per month since we have reduced our usage. Initially, we were at $900 per month."
"The platform has a reasonable cost. I rate the pricing a three out of ten."
"We are paying roughly $5,000 a month."
"The price is high and I give it a five out of ten."
"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."
"I don’t have much idea about prices, but webMethods API Portal is not something cheaper."
"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."
"webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them."
"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."
"The vendor is flexible with respect to pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Coralogix?
Numerous data monitoring tools are available, but Coralogix somehow fine-tunes our policies and effectively supports our teams.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coralogix?
The pricing is expensive. We need to reduce logs to manage costs. Despite the expense, I believe it is worth the money to have Coralogix as a tool.
What needs improvement with Coralogix?
We need to reduce the number of logs generated by our system, which are substantial. We require some form of grouping or categorization of logs to identify them better. Additionally, we find that t...
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
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Payoneer, AGS, Monday.com, Capgemini
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Coralogix vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.