Qlik Compose vs webMethods.io comparison

"It is a scalable solution."

"As long as you pick the solution that best fits with your requirements, you won't find that performance is a problem. It's good."

"The technical support is very good. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."

"It's a stable solution."

"I have found it to be a very good, stable, and strong product."

"I like modeling and code generation. It has become a pretty handy tool because of its short ideation to delivery time. From the time you decide you are modeling a data warehouse, and once you finish the modeling, it generates all the code, generates all the tables. All you have to do is tick a few things, and you can produce a fully functional warehouse. I also like that they have added all the features I have asked for over four years."

"One of the most valuable features was the ability to integrate multiple source systems that mainly used structured IDBMS versions."

"Qlik Compose is good enough. It is user-friendly and intuitive."

"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."

"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."

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

"​Broker and UM are the best features."

"One valuable feature is that it is event-driven, so when new data is available on the source it can be quickly processed and displayed. Integration is definitely another useful feature, and B2B is one area where webMethods has its own unique thing going, whereby we can do monitoring of transactions, monitoring of client onboarding, and so on."

"I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods."

"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."

"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."

"I believe that visual data flow management and the transformation function should be improved."

"There could be more customization options."

"It could enhance its capabilities in the realm of self-service options as currently, it is more suited for individuals with technical proficiency who can create pages using it."

"When processing data from certain tables with a large volume of data, we encounter significant delays. For instance, when dealing with around one million records, it typically takes three to four hours. To address this, I aim to implement performance improvements across all tables, ensuring swift processing similar to those that are currently complete within seconds. The performance issue primarily arises when we analyze the inserts and updates from the source, subsequently dropping the table. While new insertions are handled promptly, updates are processed slowly, leading to performance issues. Despite consulting our Qlik vendors, they were unable to pinpoint the exact cause of this occurrence. Consequently, I am seeking ways to optimize performance within Qlik Compose, specifically concerning updates."

"The solution has room for improvement in the ETL. They have an ETL, but when it comes to the monitoring portion, Qlik Compose doesn't provide a feature for monitoring."

"I'd like to have access to more developer training materials."

"There is some scope for improvement around the documentation, and a better UI would definitely help."

"It would be better if the first level of technical support were a bit more technically knowledgeable to solve the problem. I think they could also improve the injection of custom scripts. It is pretty difficult to add additional scripts. If the modeling doesn't give you what you want, and you want to change the script generated by the modeling, it is a bit more challenging than in most other products. It is very good with standard form type systems, but if you get a more complicated data paradigm, it tends to struggle with transforming that into a model."

"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."

"I would like to see the price improve."

"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."

"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."

"Scalability and connectors to different cloud applications is lacking."

"The on-premises setup can be difficult."

"We'd like for them to open up to a more cloud-based solution that could offer more flexibility and maybe a better rules engine or more integration with rules engines."

"The orchestration is not as good as it should be."

"The price of the solution is expensive."

"While they outperform Tableau, there's room for improvement in Qlik's pricing structures, especially for corporate clients like us."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is very expensive, I rate the solution a six."

"The product is expensive."

"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."

"webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them."

"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."

"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."

"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."

"webMethods Integration Server is expensive, and there's no fixed price on it because it has a point pricing model. You can negotiate, which makes it interesting."

"It is worth the cost."