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

Oracle Big Data SQL vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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

Oracle Big Data SQL
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
16th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
7th
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), API Management (10th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of Oracle Big Data SQL is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 4.4%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Mohamed Moustafa - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good scalability, strong stability and seamless integration
The user interface is really user-friendly and intuitive. It was a major plus. The integration process was smooth. Oracle's security is good and significantly better than that of other solutions I've encountered. Previously, we had separate data interfaces for 15 concrete mixing plants, requiring manual document creation in Oracle. Now, with integrated automation, production has become much easier and more efficient over the past three years.
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 user interface is really user-friendly and intuitive."
"This solution can maintain a large volume of data and is flexible to what data it can handle. The performance is very good."
"webMethods platform is used to build an EAI platform, enabling communication between many internal systems and third-party operators."
"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."
"It’s fairly easy to view, move, and mange access across different components. Different component types are categorized and can be viewed in a web based administration console."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is its reliability. It has a lot of great documentation from the service providers. Additionally, it is easy to use."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"All of the components are very independent but are tied together to give the business value."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
 

Cons

"The solution could improve by adding more advanced features."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing."
"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."
"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."
"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"The product must add more compatible connectors."
"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."
"On the monitoring side of things, the UI for monitoring could be improved. It's a bit cumbersome to work with."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."
"The product is very expensive."
"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."
"Always plan five years ahead and don’t jeopardize the quality of your project by dropping items from the bill of materials."
"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."
"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."
"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."
"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
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

What do you like most about Oracle Big Data SQL?
The user interface is really user-friendly and intuitive.
What needs improvement with Oracle Big Data SQL?
There is room for improvement in the pricing.
What is your primary use case for Oracle Big Data SQL?
With Oracle Big Data SQL, I primarily managed data organization and structure. It helped streamline data within the system. I integrated Oracle with other systems. I worked with Oracle integrations...
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

No data available
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Big Data SQL vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.