Layer7 API Management vs webMethods.io comparison

Broadcom and IBM are both solutions in the API Management category. Broadcom is ranked #11 with an average rating of 7.6, while IBM is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.1. Broadcom holds a 3.0% mindshare in APIM, compared to IBM’s 2.2% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Layer7 API Management

Read 111 Layer7 API Management reviews

4,887 Views
3,641 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 91 webMethods.io reviews

3,199 Views
2,279 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Layer7 API Management

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Layer7 API Management and webMethods.io are competitive in the API solutions category. Layer7 appears to have an edge in data security and traffic routing, which are vital for mobile-first strategies, while webMethods.io stands out in integration capabilities, especially with legacy systems.

Features: Layer7 is recognized for its robust API gateway that manages protocol and security token translation. It provides seamless REST-to-SOAP conversions and supports OAuth implementation, essential for securing API calls. Layer7 also offers load-balancing features and integrations with SiteMinder to guard against threats like DDoS. webMethods.io is notable for its comprehensive integration capabilities, efficient data mapping, and lifecycle management which are crucial in complex enterprise environments. It features a flow language that aids in simplifying the debugging and development process.

Room for Improvement: Layer7 users suggest foundational token support should be integrated directly into the base product to avoid additional costs for features like OAuth. Enhancements to the developer portal could elevate user experience. webMethods.io could improve its interface for more intuitive use and expand its middleware integration support, highlighting the need for a streamlined user experience aligned with existing infrastructures. Improving the developer portal is also noted as a potential area for webMethods.io.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Layer7 provides on-premises and hybrid cloud deployment options. Feedback on customer service varies, especially post-Broadcom acquisition, with some users noting responsiveness issues. webMethods.io also supports on-premises and hybrid deployments. It is generally praised for good support, though similar to Layer7, users occasionally report delays. Both are recognized for strong technical support, despite some concerns about timeliness.

Pricing and ROI: Layer7 is considered pricey yet competitive, often requiring negotiation to reach a suitable price point. It can offer cost savings compared to competitors depending on the specific feature set utilized. webMethods.io is also seen as expensive but is justified by its vast integration features. Users note the potential for a favorable ROI, thanks to efficient API management, despite higher upfront costs. Both platforms emphasize understanding their value propositions to justify the investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Layer7 API Management vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Layer7 API Management vs. webMethods.io

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 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

Layer7 API Management

Ranking in API Management

11th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

111

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

webMethods.io

Ranking in API Management

10th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business-to-Business Middleware (4th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), Cloud Data Integration (9th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Layer7 API Management is 3.0%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

API Management

Featured Reviews

Ronald D'Souza

Presales Consultant for CA Southern Africa at Hyperion Holding Pty Ltd

Has great drag-and-drop features and it requires minimal coding

I have mainly implemented using Layer 7 API Management. Some of the major challenges we were able to meet with a quick release to market methodology. Some of the tasks which we achieved for our customers were: 1. Translation service from SOAP to REST and vice versa. 2. API service to DB (Oracle, MySQL, MSSQL, Snowflake, SAP HANA) -- Created Swagger APIs that were able to perform CRUD operation to the backend API mentioned above and provided routes to query and get data. 3. Integration with Payment gateway service providers to perform (transaction on behalf of the customer with third-party payment gateway service providers white labeled with our APIs ) -- Followed TMF standards for payment gateway integration with the Telcom world. 4. Orchestration of the API. Build multiple microservers and provided orchestration based on route, path, and data in the request and perform actions that would be communicated with multiple APIs and provide a single consolidated response. 5. Provided API-driven security (Oauth 2.0, JWT, SAML, Basic, and a variety of means) to access the API giving the developer the freedom to concentrate only on application/service/microservice and let the gateway handle the threat. 6. Seamless Mutual Authentication allowed good segregation between APIs in the DMZ and internal network.

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

"Easy to use, nice UI, and good search functionality."

"It is a stable product."

"What I found most valuable in Layer7 API Management is that you can launch the API from the gateway quickly and securely, making it less complicated to deploy APIs. I also like that Layer7 API Management has a good portal and dashboards and that the dashboards show you statistics regarding how many people used the API, etc."

"API Enhanced Portal 4.1 looks very promising. API Gateway policy manager for writing policies is excellent. It is the best in the industry for policy writing."

"From a security standpoint, it works great. It is the right solution for us. It's lightweight, a software-appliance configuration which was easy to deploy and configure."

"Simple to use and easy to develop APIs."

"Has great drag-and-drop features and requires minimal coding."

"You can create little, custom Java assertions that you can insert to do your business logic, which might not be covered by the commercial product out-of-the-box."

More Layer7 API Management pros

"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."

"One of the most important features is that it gives you the possibility to do low-level integration. It provides a lot of features out of the box, and over the years, it has matured so much that any problem that is there in the market can be solved with this product. We can meet any requirements through customizations, transformations, or the logic that needs to be put in. Some of the other products struggle in this aspect. They cannot do things in a certain way, or they have a product limitation, whereas, with webMethods, I have never faced this kind of problem."

"One valuable feature is that it is event-driven, so when new data is available on the source it can be quickly processed and displayed. Integration is definitely another useful feature, and B2B is one area where webMethods has its own unique thing going, whereby we can do monitoring of transactions, monitoring of client onboarding, and so on."

"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."

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

"I like the tool's scalability."

"The Software AG Designer has been great. It's very intuitive."

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

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"The implementation of CA API Management was complex. It is a complicated solution. You have to know so much IT knowledge to do the implementation."

"Some users say that the API lacks some features and is lagging behind the competition although that has not been my personal experience."

"The Policy Manager tool that is used to manage the solution is very heavy to use because it is based in Java. Sometimes it takes a long time to load. There could be some improvements to it. If they could make Policy Manager on a web page that would be a good alternative."

"There are old algorithms that the tool does not support - and it shouldn't, in my opinion. But sometimes customers need old algorithms, from old use cases and old applications, migrated to the platform. At those times, there are hiccups that happen."

"The CA API Management solution has good security features, but when it comes to being used in areas like enterprise integration, where it is being used as middleware for all the IT environments, that particular feature is quite limited. It doesn't support as many protocols as an industry standard, competing product should."

"We are looking for improvements related to integration. We want to see them add integration tools to the CA bundle. That would be helpful."

"As the number of instances increases, its complexity of installation increases if you do not use the OVA."

"The UI design could be improved in the next release."

More Layer7 API Management cons

"A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility."

"The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"Scalability and connectors to different cloud applications is lacking."

"The market webMethods Integration Server falls under is a very crowded market, so for the product to stand out, Software AG would need to get traction in the open source community by releasing a new version or a base version and open source it, so people can create new custom components and add it to the portfolio."

"It is quite expensive."

"It would be nice if they had a change management system offering. We built our own deployer application because the one built into webMethods couldn't enforce change management rules. Integration into a change management system, along with the version control system, would be a good offering; it's something that they're lacking."

"Perhaps in the area of Microservices, where I think Trading Networks could benefit from some improvements."

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

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Purchase 4.0 now and wait until they flush out the 4.1 problems."

"Licenses are required to operate the product, but I don't know much about the validity periods attached to it."

"Keep in mind the non-product licensing, e.g., if you opt not to use the embedded SQL."

"Pricing for Layer7 API Management is excellent, so it's an eight out of ten. The product is less expensive than other solutions. Layer7 API Management charges you based on the number of transactions, so the enterprise-level pricing my company got was excellent."

"I do not have experience with the pricing or licensing of the product."

"Do not buy piecemeal."

"Pricing is competitive. CA is ready to offer attractive discounts."

"It's my manager who takes care of the pricing. But I keep on hearing that it's a little pricey, it's on the higher side. That is what he says."

More Layer7 API Management pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

"It is a cost-effective solution."

"Pricing is the number-one downfall. It's too expensive. They could make more money by dropping the price in half and getting more customers. It's the best product there is, but it's too expensive."

"I do think webMethods is coming under increasing pressure when it comes to their price-to-feature value proposition. It's probably the single biggest strategic risk they have. They're very expensive in their industry. They've been raising the price recently, especially when compared with their competitors."

"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."

"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."

"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."

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Layer7 API Management?

The solution's technical support is good.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Layer7 API Management?

The pricing is expensive compared to other products.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Layer7 API Management?

Layer7 API Management could be improved in its logging and alert mechanisms. Furthermore, although cloud deployment has been introduced, I am not familiar with all recent updates. In previous versi...

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

Apigee vs Layer7 API Management

Compared 33% of the time

Kong Gateway Enterprise vs Layer7 API Management

Compared 15% of the time

MuleSoft API Manager vs Layer7 API Management

Compared 14% of the time

Amazon API Gateway vs Layer7 API Management

Compared 11% of the time

3scale API Management vs Layer7 API Management

Compared 2% of the time

More Layer7 API Management Competitors

IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

SAP Cloud Platform vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Layer7 API Management

February 2025

Download Layer7 API Management product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

January 2025

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

CA API Management, CA Live API Creator, Espresso Logic, CA API Gateway

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

Overview

Layer7 API Management is a comprehensive solution that enables organizations to securely expose, manage, and monetize their APIs.

It provides features such as API gateway, developer portal, analytics, and security to ensure seamless integration and control over API traffic.

With Layer7 API Management, businesses can streamline their API operations and drive innovation.

Broadcom

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

1. IBM 2. Microsoft 3. Oracle 4. Salesforce 5. SAP 6. Cisco 7. Dell 8. HP 9. Adobe 10. VMware 11. Accenture 12. Capgemini 13. Deloitte 14. PwC 15. Ernst & Young 16. Infosys 17. TCS (Tata Consultancy Services) 18. Wipro 19. Cognizant 20. HCL Technologies 21. Tech Mahindra 22. Fujitsu 23. Hitachi 24. NEC 25. NTT Data 26. Ericsson 27. Nokia 28. Siemens 29. AT&T 30. Verizon 31. Vodafone 32. Orange

Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings

Buyer's Guide

Layer7 API Management vs. webMethods.io

January 2025

Free Report: Layer7 API Management vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about Layer7 API Management vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Layer7 API Management vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best API Management vendors and best Cloud Data Integration 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.