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

OpenText Trading Grid vs SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite 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

OpenText Trading Grid
Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware
12th
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (35th)
SEEBURGER Business Integrat...
Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware
6th
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (13th), API Management (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Business-to-Business Middleware category, the mindshare of OpenText Trading Grid is 4.7%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is 9.8%, up from 9.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business-to-Business Middleware Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite9.8%
OpenText Trading Grid4.7%
Other85.5%
Business-to-Business Middleware
 

Featured Reviews

VARUNKUMAR - PeerSpot reviewer
Industry-leading, easy to implement, and has good mapping specification guidelines
The good thing about OpenText is that we have the mapping specification guideline available, which is not there in a solution like SEEBURGER. Whenever you want to take a decision to move away from OpenText, you have already documented your mapping and what your mapping looks like. So you go to the next provider, provide them with that mapping specification, and it'll be very easy for them to develop a new map instead of just taking the data - input data, output data - and then looking for how the data is getting transformed. So you have the mapping spec level which is a very good feature of OpenText, which we do not have in SEEBURGER. It's very hard to move from SEEBURGER. The solution is easy to implement. It's stable and reliable. They are the industry leaders in the integration space.
Choon Hwa Khoh - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to configure with no programming skills needed and helpful support
We primarily use the solution for content conversion and file transfers.  There are no programming skills needed. It's easy to configure.  The features are great. They have a lot of them. The solution can scale. It is stable and reliable. We have not had any issues. Technical support has been…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is easy to implement."
"The ease of integration of the SEEBURGER product into SAP was pretty seamless. There wasn't any trouble, there weren't any complexities."
"My overall rating for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is 10 out of 10."
"When orders come in they go into our ERP system directly, so there is integration there."
"The product has the ability to handle high volumes of data efficiently."
"It used to take half an hour to move one file from one location to another. Now, it takes 10 minutes."
"We rarely get hanged processes."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is simple to use and straightforward."
"If SEEBURGER plans to do something, they will meet their target. We haven't been disappointed by them at all. For example, we had six trading partners to onboard and they said, "We'll make it happen," and they did make it happen. They did exactly what they said they would do. That's a really positive thing."
 

Cons

"Technical support needs to be better."
"We are a little locked in with understanding the errors that we receive. We are working with their support to prevent these issues when they come into the database. We use a SQL database and believe they can do better when it comes working with large databases. We have had few instances where the system is hanging, which are most likely from the database. We are working with their support to find out the problem and fix their system. We have tried to use their notification system to prevent these issues, but they need to improve their monitoring system."
"It's rather difficult to understand, from the application, what's broken and why it doesn't work. We typically need to get support from them directly, and it's usually in a consulting role, to fix issues."
"The cloud interface is currently too cluttered, especially when creating new transactions from scratch or performing search queries."
"In some of the other tools out there in the market, you can create one service and use that service without creating a copy. That kind of capability currently doesn't exist in this solution."
"In the BIS, if I want to have some API functionalities, that is a separate tool. The integration between the API tool and the BIS is not that straightforward. If they were to combine these tools and give us one suite, that would be helpful. Today I have a lot of partners onboard. I have something like 50,000 partners doing API transactions. If I want to introduce a new tool for API management, I have to do a lot of workarounds. But if it were integrated well within the existing suite, it could be straightforward for me."
"A true debugger that allows you to step through the process would be a good improvement. Right now, we are limited to reading the log file generated by the test screen in Mapping Designer."
"The product is not integrated very well with different cloud providers. We did work with the vendor to build a solution for Amazon, but there is no solution for other cloud providers like Google or Azure. The vendor needs to create adapters so that if we have a requirement to transfer data from our data center to another cloud, outside of Amazon, we would be delighted with that."
"There might be some improvements they could make to the portal, but they're not anything that stops me from working."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The way they have their licensing structure set up, they have a lot of different modules. For us, we did not really know if we were licensed for certain things or not. We had to reach out to them multiple times to tell them that we were looking for this or that capability. We had to buy licenses for different things at different points in time, not knowing that we could have it bundled initially."
"Our licensing model is based on transactions. We have a base service contract which is priced against a volume of transactions and another volume of individual transactions, which are covered by one service agreement. Then, we have development services on top of that. Our annual spend is around £80,000. It's about mid-priced, as there are some cheaper alternatives out there and some more expensive ones. It's neither cheap nor expensive. It's somewhere in the middle."
"We pay maintenance of between $75,000 and $100,000 per year, per box."
"I have had exposure to other big vendors over the years and would have to say the pricing is pretty typical. They all fall into a common pricing range, at least the bigger vendors: Axway, IBM Sterling, Globalscape, and SEEBURGER. They all fall into that mid-tier pricing. So, SEEBURGER is commensurate with other large integration vendors operating in this space. Maybe it is lower than some of the really high-end ones. You can get some of these high-end transactional messaging integration systems, like TIBCO, that tend to be kind of on a higher echelon of pricing. I would say SEEBURGER is more mid-level."
"We have additional ad hoc development costs, but those vary depending on if we're bringing on another third-party into our systems via the EDI integration. So, that's highly variable."
"The cost of the SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) can be considered high. We have elected to have SEEBURGER consulting do the installation. Licensing could also be considered high. However, one would be hard pressed to find another product that does all that this one does."
"There is a standard agreement for the messaging every month. But if we make a change request — a change to a mapping or something like that — then there is a fixed price per hour."
"On an annual basis, our support costs, which are based on the licensing, are about £120,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business-to-Business Middleware solutions are best for your needs.
872,019 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Retailer
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
9%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is a highly stable solution that offers rich features for our B2B integration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding the pricing of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, I would rate it as 7 out of 10.
What needs improvement with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding areas of improvement for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, the cloud functionality needs enhancement. The cloud interface is currently too cluttered, especially when creating new tran...
 

Also Known As

Trading Grid, GXS Trading Grid
SEEBURGER BIS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Autoliv, Hella, Hutchinson, Michelin
Altis, Autoliv, Cebi, Cofresco, MoneyGram International, Samsonite Europe, VSP Global, BMW Group, OSRAM, Magna, Lavazza
Find out what your peers are saying about Salesforce, SAP, IBM and others in Business-to-Business Middleware. Updated: October 2025.
872,019 professionals have used our research since 2012.