We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and Kong Gateway Enterprise based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Since it runs on top of Datapower, all Datapower based custom policies can be utilized and exported to API connect but its not straightforward/simple process."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is very easy to use and is something that is easily configurable."
"I have found the API Management to be most valuable."
"This product is well integrated with other products. Its ability to interact with IBM Secure Gateway and other integration products is the core feature. Also, the lead time to put it into production is relatively short ."
"API Connect is a good product, and everything works fine. All the analytics are good, and it is easy to follow up. I like it in that sense. I'm more focused on following up on analytics by seeing how many API calls we are getting and where we see a lot of problems. I was working on that API level."
"The product gathers data to measure API performance."
"Policy configurations are pretty easy."
"One of the most valuable features is that we can seamlessly and harmoniously expose our capabilities, from a security point of view."
"The solution's technical support is good and fast in terms of responsiveness and problem-solving skills."
"Kong Enterprise has excellent plugin support."
"This is a solid intrusion prevention system that combines a firewall and antivirus in a single solution."
"There are a few features that I like about Kong when it comes to authentication and authorization. Specifically, being able to use Kong for role-based access control (RBAC), and then further being able to integrate the RBAC mechanism with our enterprise directory, was very useful."
"The tool's scalability is good...The solution's technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it seamlessly supports a vast number of tools."
"Kong Enterprise comes with some ready plug-ins, which is very good for the customers."
"The features I like include ease of operation and implementation in a cloud environment, the dashboarding features for API statistics, and the user-friendly developer portal."
"In the next version, I don't know if they've already been included it or not, but the designer and all the tools should be on the cloud. I don't want any external installation or local installation."
"Understanding the architecture, deployment criteria, and communication methods of the installation can be time-consuming."
"Components, like caching, should be implemented as policies, not requiring dependency on an external solution."
"The solution is overly complex."
"There is room for improvement regarding the connectivity of the DevOps."
"Support for this platform could still be improved. It also needs to have more levels of versatility. Its compatibility and integration with different platforms also need improvement."
"Like any typical IBM infrastructure setup, you need to learn to set it up yourself. It's not one of those simple zip files or an archive unzip and you're up and running in some few minutes. Knowledge to set it up is key."
"The administration of the user interface and the technical documentation are areas of concern in the solution where improvements are required."
"The ease of billing is lost when Kong is not available directly on the Azure marketplace. This is one area where they can improve."
"Kong Enterprise fails to provide live tracing of the APIs, which is possible nowadays."
"The developer portal needs to be improved."
"There should be an easier way to integrate with other solutions, even though it's the same API solution layer. Comparability will be a good improvement."
"The OS upgrades are not as frequent as they should be and they are bulky."
"Kong Enterprise needs to improve its pricing, which starts at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Pricing should be based on API usage rather than monthly. It should improve its documentation as well."
"Kong Enterprise has decided not to support the web portal feature anymore, but I think that feature should stay in the on-premises solution."
"We are facing issues with the solution's features like reports and traffic analysis."
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while Kong Gateway Enterprise is ranked 6th in API Management with 20 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while Kong Gateway Enterprise is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Offers basic API orchestration and provides robust security and governance features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kong Gateway Enterprise writes "Provides role-based access control and can be easily customized with Lua script". IBM API Connect is most compared with IBM DataPower Gateway, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Layer7 API Management, whereas Kong Gateway Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, WSO2 API Manager, Apache APISIX, Apigee and IBM DataPower Gateway. See our IBM API Connect vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management 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.
