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

Magic xpi Integration Platform vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Magic xpi Integration Platform
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
24th
Average Rating
3.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (4th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), API Management (9th), Cloud Data Integration (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) category, the mindshare of Magic xpi Integration Platform is 0.4%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 9.0%, up from 8.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user977634 - PeerSpot reviewer
A low-performing integration tool
We use it as an in-house back-type integration tool. It allows us to have different integrations between different systems It does not perform well. It needs more reusable components that are unlimited in time. Furthermore, it relies on the files systems and does not create components, so it is…
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

"The stability of the solution is OK."
"Currently, we're using this solution for the integration server which helps us to integrate with the mainframe."
"It has a good integration server, designer, and a very good API portal."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The connectivity that the tool provides, along with the functionalities needed for our company's business, are some of the beneficial aspects of the product."
"Segregation of deployment for the environments is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well."
 

Cons

"It is not performing well."
"webMethods.io Integration's installation is complex. It should also improve integration and connectors."
"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"A while ago, they were hacked, and it took them a very long time to open their website again in order to download any service packs or any features. I don't know what they could do differently. I know that they were vulnerable, and there was some downtime, but because they were down, we were unable to download any potential service packs."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
"The Software AG Designer could be more memory-efficient or CPU-efficient so that we can use it with middle-spec hardware."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"Rules engine processes and BPM processes should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."
"Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client."
"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."
"It's a good deal for the money that we pay."
"The pricing is a yearly license."
"Its cost depends on the use cases."
"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."
"Currently, the licensing solution for this product is pretty straightforward. The way that Software AG has moved in their licensing agreements is very understandable. It is very easy for you to see where things land. Like most vendors today, they are transaction based. Therefore, just having a good understanding of how many transactions that you are doing a year would be very wise. Luckily, there are opportunities to work with the vendor to get a good understanding of how many transactions you have and what is the right limit for you to fall under."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Retailer
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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.
 

Also Known As

Magic xpi Integration Platform, iBOLT
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Godrej Properties
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Salesforce, Oracle and others in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS). Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.