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

IBM App Connect vs Zapier comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.2
IBM App Connect enhances ROI and efficiency, though financial expertise and skilled teams are essential for maximizing benefits.
No sentiment score available
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
IBM App Connect's support is helpful but inconsistent, with delays in complex issues and needs improvement in remote assistance.
Sentiment score
7.7
Zapier's customer service is praised for efficient support, though some miss an on-demand chat, with documentation also helpful.
 

Stability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
7.0
Zapier is generally stable, though occasional glitches and third-party tool issues can affect reliability; most users rate it highly.
 

Room For Improvement

Zapier users seek enhanced support, documentation, and integrations, addressing usability, pricing, and feature improvements for increased functionality.
 

Setup Cost

IBM App Connect licensing is costly and complex but adjustable, with fees based on usage and potential discounts available.
Zapier pricing varies from free to over $800 monthly, depending on task complexity and volume, with scalable payment options.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM App Connect
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Zapier
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of IBM App Connect is 3.5%, up from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zapier is 2.0%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Mehdi El Filahi - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers flexible adapters, good scalability but logging can be difficult at times
There is room for improvement in the logging messages. Sometimes, if you put someone new into App Connect, they can abandon it the same day. The logging is really painful. However, IBM has made efforts to integrate with Elasticsearch for logging, so that's an improvement. Overall, the logging can be difficult at times. One more important point is that if IBM improves its CI/CD capabilities, it will make a big difference. Right now, I have to create my own CI/CD setup from scratch for every client, which is inefficient. Back in 2013, I worked with Sonic ESB, and even then, it had CI/CD with Maven. With App Connect, you need to build everything yourself when using tools like Jenkins, Bamboo, or CircleCI. IBM really needs to provide official support for this.
FrankHo - PeerSpot reviewer
Though the tool offers a visually appealing UI, it needs to improve its documentation
With Zapier, improvements are required in the areas of concerns like bugs, ease of use, and documentation. The product has many bugs, so users have to wait for a period ranging from five minutes to an hour to see where the Zap went. In Zapier, Zaps aren't very understandable owing to the way they work. As a user, you would think that in Zapier, a Zap works in a particular way once you set it up, but it won't happen. At times, some Zaps can interfere with each other, because of which there might be infinite loops that may occur, owing to which multiple Zaps continue to run or break down in general, after which nothing would run in your environment. You would not be notified about the breakdown of Zaps. The bugs in the product may be considered to understand or get an explanation of how Zaps works between software systems, so for something between Gmail and HubSpot, Zapier would explain through better documentation what would work and what wouldn't work. Maybe if Zapier had better functionality with Python or any other coding language in general, it would make the product a lot better.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
58%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
3%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
9%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM App Connect?
I like the adapters. The adapters help us achieve scalability. If you want to connect to SAP, there's an adapter. Salesforce? There's an adapter. You want to connect to another system? There's like...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM App Connect?
IBM App Connect's pricing is high compared to other products.
What is your primary use case for IBM App Connect?
Our company has a big project for delivery and e-commerce sites. We use IBM App Connect to deliver information to our end users after they buy our products. We get information from many places, suc...
What do you like most about Zapier?
The product's most valuable feature is automation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zapier?
The pricing is suitable. It's not cheap, but not expensive.
What needs improvement with Zapier?
The pricing could be a little cheaper.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

IBM Cast Iron
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

United Way of Allegheny County, Saint-Gobain CPS, Ricoh, SunTrust Banks Inc.
BuzzFeed, Groupon, Spotify, Columbia University, FOX
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM App Connect vs. Zapier and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.