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

MuleSoft API Manager vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 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
6.9
MuleSoft API Manager boosts efficiency and reduces complexity, aiding financial firms with faster development and automation benefits.
Sentiment score
7.1
webMethods.io delivers rapid ROI through cost savings, reduced downtime, and increased productivity, depending on specific implementations.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.7
MuleSoft API Manager offers efficient customer service and praised technical support despite occasional upselling and premium support charges.
Sentiment score
6.6
webMethods.io's customer service is praised for responsiveness, but users note occasional delays and desire improved technical support communication.
Our enterprise pays for a special success program, which provides priority support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
MuleSoft API Manager offers scalable solutions, praised for user volume support but criticized for costs and configuration challenges.
Sentiment score
7.2
webMethods.io is praised for its scalability in cloud and on-premises environments, with some licensing constraints noted.
Vertically, scalability is fine, however, I have not expanded horizontally with the product yet.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
MuleSoft API Manager is stable and reliable, with high user ratings, though cost and capacity issues are noted.
Sentiment score
7.6
webMethods.io is generally stable and reliable, with minor issues in specific modules and cloud version maturity needed.
There are some issues like the tool hanging or the need for additional jars when exposing web services.
 

Room For Improvement

MuleSoft API Manager requires improvements in user interfaces, analytics, scalability, integration, monitoring, and enhancements in security and AI capabilities.
webMethods.io needs clearer documentation, better scalability, intuitive interfaces, and improved integration and cost-effectiveness for enhanced user experience.
Introducing features related to auto governance without manual effort would make the API Manager smarter and more efficient for enterprises with complex landscapes.
A special discount of at least 50% for old customers would allow us to expand our services and request more resources.
 

Setup Cost

MuleSoft API Manager is costly, ranging from $80,000 to $400,000 annually, but offers comprehensive features and flexibility.
Enterprise buyers find webMethods.io costly but valuable, offering flexibility and comprehensive solutions, particularly beneficial for large-scale enterprises.
The cost for using MuleSoft is approximately $500,000 USD per year.
 

Valuable Features

MuleSoft API Manager enhances API management with scalability, security, seamless integration, policy enforcement, analytics, and intuitive low-code tools.
webMethods.io excels in seamless integration, user-friendliness, robust security, and scalability, offering efficient tools and reliable management for diverse needs.
MuleSoft's ability to connect to third-party monitoring platforms like AWS, Datadog, and Elastic makes operational analysis more efficient.
It facilitates the exposure of around 235 services through our platform to feed various government entities across the entire country.
 

Categories and Ranking

MuleSoft API Manager
Ranking in API Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
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
92
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of MuleSoft API Manager is 4.9%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.1%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

Dipanjan_Nandi - PeerSpot reviewer
Valuable testing stubs and policy enforcement with room for better security and cost management
From an API management perspective, MuleSoft's API Manager is not as powerful as some other tools available. Features like monetization and advanced security, which are present in Apigee, are missing. I also want the API Manager to be used as a separate product apart from MuleSoft's other integration solutions. Additionally, the licensing cost is high, and many clients are looking to switch due to this.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Kong Enterprise compare with Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager?
The Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager was designed with its users in mind. Though it is a reasonably complex piece of software, it is easy to install and upgrade. While there are different things that ...
How does Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager compare with Amazon API Gateway?
I have found that Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is the best integration tool out there for API management. It is easy to implement and learn; it provides several options for deployment, (including ...
What do you like most about Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager?
The most valuable features of the solution for securing APIs stem from the tool's ability to allow users to deploy policies.
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

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Coca-Cola, Splunk, Citrix, UCSF, Vertu, State of Colorado, National Post, TiVo, Deakin, LLS, Oldcastle Precast, ParcelPoint, Justice Systems, Ube, Sumitomo Corporation, PacificComp, University of Witwatersrand, Groupe Initiatives, Camelot, Panviva
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about MuleSoft API Manager vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.