Mule ESB vs webMethods.io comparison

"I'm not using ESB directly. It is the integration layer, so it's running under the hood. However, the conversion and transformation performance is excellent. Anypoint Enterprise Security is also solid."

"It's open source, and there are a lot of community resources. Mule ESB makes it easy to connect to other software applications."

"The connectivity the solution provides is excellent. There are often too many systems that we have to integrate and this helps with that."

"Mule ESB is a very easy-to-use and user-friendly solution."

"The setup is straightforward."

"Once it is started, we don't see any problems on a day to day basis."

"The solution offers multiple deployment options."

"The most valuable feature is that it's programmer-friendly, so it's very easy to develop APIs."

"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."

"Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations."

"webMethods Integration Server is an easy-to-use solution and does not require a lot of coding."

"ActiveTransfer lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it. After that, we can remove the file to make sure that the reconciliation process is done. Sometimes we will zip and unzip the files, but if we have a GKB file, we often ignore it."

"All of the components are very independent but are tied together to give the business value."

"The product is very stable."

"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."

"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."

"In the next release, I would like to see improvement in the generator for the DataWeave language so that it's a little more graphic."

"MuleSoft is not so strong in method-based integration, so they're not so functional in that regard."

"It would be much more beneficial if the solution included AI and business process management."

"Community editions need more attention."

"Mule ESB isn't as secure as IBM. Financial companies go with IBM for that reason."

"We would like to have a built-in logging framework in which we can do auditing."

"MuleSoft isn't as mature as some other integration technologies out there like IBM WebSphere. There's room for growth, and MuleSoft is working toward that."

"It needs more samples. Also, the dependency on Maven should be removed."

"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."

"The Software AG Designer could be more memory-efficient or CPU-efficient so that we can use it with middle-spec hardware."

"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."

"The on-premises setup can be difficult."

"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."

"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."

"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."

"This product has too many gaps. You find them after update installations. This should be covered by automatic testing."

"The solution is expensive."

"You will not get any support from Mule ESB's team for the tool's community edition...You can get support with the licensed version of Mule ESB."

"This product is expensive, but it does offer value for money."

"Mule ESB is a costly solution. We pay approximately $80,000 annually for the system. The cost of the number of instances, annual subscription, and cloud hosting services are expensive."

"The various features and components for this solution are no longer free."

"I think the price is very high. If you use TIBCO BW, the license is for the CPU usage, then the IPS, and support. I also think the license for the product is a one-time expense."

"This product is cheaper than some offered by other vendors, although there is a problem because you have to pay for some third-party adapters."

"Plan your licensing model (cloud or on-premises or hybrid) that will allow seamless integration with new partners."

"webMethods.io Integration's pricing is high and has yearly subscription costs."

"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."

"Always plan five years ahead and don’t jeopardize the quality of your project by dropping items from the bill of materials."

"The product is expensive."

"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."

"The pricing is a yearly license."

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

"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."