SAP Process Orchestration vs webMethods.io comparison

SAP and IBM are both solutions in the Business-to-Business Middleware category. SAP is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while IBM is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.1. SAP holds a 9.0% mindshare in BBM, compared to IBM’s 10.0% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of SAP users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

SAP Process Orchestration

Read 32 SAP Process Orchestration reviews

2,669 Views
1,114 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 91 webMethods.io reviews

1,107 Views
779 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

SAP Process Orchestration

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

SAP Process Orchestration and webMethods.io offer integration solutions, competing in the integration software market. SAP Process Orchestration appeals to SAP-centric enterprises, while webMethods.io leads with cloud connectivity.

Features: SAP Process Orchestration supports BPMN, seamless ERP integration, and comprehensive security, ensuring stable and effective business process management. WebMethods.io offers rapid cloud integration, intuitive user design, and real-time analytics, prioritizing cloud-first strategies.

Room for Improvement: SAP Process Orchestration could focus on simplifying deployment complexity, advancing cloud-native features, and enhancing user experience. WebMethods.io might improve SAP integration depth, expand its toolkit, and optimize for high-volume data handling.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: WebMethods.io, being cloud-native, facilitates quick deployment with reliable support. SAP Process Orchestration involves more complex on-premises setup but provides robust support for SAP users.

Pricing and ROI: WebMethods.io offers flexible Pay-as-You-Go pricing, often leading to quicker ROI for cloud-focused businesses. SAP Process Orchestration requires a higher initial investment, justified in complex SAP environments with gradual ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 837,501 peers since 2012

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

SAP Process Orchestration

Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

webMethods.io

Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (9th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Business-to-Business Middleware category, the mindshare of SAP Process Orchestration is 9.0%, down from 13.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 10.0%, up from 7.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Business-to-Business Middleware

Featured Reviews

Laxman Molugu

Chief Executive Officer at Saanvi systems inc

Enhances operational efficiency with valuable prepackaged content and cost-effective pricing

For organizations that operate within an SAP ecosystem, SAP Process Orchestration is recommended due to its cost-effectiveness and the availability of valuable prepackaged content. It is important to consider the needs of your industry, as SAP Process Orchestration may not meet all requirements in consumer-oriented sectors. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Read full review

Michele Illiano

Head of Division at Innovery

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SAP Process Orchestration provides extensive integrations with external partners, supports B2B operations, and has prepackaged content that saves development time."

"The most valuable features of SAP Process Orchestration are the standard APIs that we can use."

"The main benefit is that the solution is low maintenance. Moreover, it's the license cost is very low because it's part of the package. The maintenance is standard maintenance. And the updates are regular. So there's a regular update and you can choose whether you want to do those updates or not."

"The solution is stable."

"Orchestration is beneficial for us."

"Great monitoring tools and has its own alert framework."

"SAP Process Orchestration has all the features that are necessary."

"It is strategically focused to forecast a global integration platform for our business."

More SAP Process Orchestration pros

"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."

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

"The orchestration aspects of APIs, the integration capabilities, and the logging functionalities were the most critical features of our workflow."

"The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you."

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

"The messaging part is the most valuable feature."

"The development is very fast. If you know what you're doing, you can develop something very easily and very fast."

"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"SAP Process Orchestration breaks down sometimes."

"It is scalable, but there can be performance issues with high data volume or traffic, especially during month ends."

"This is an on-premise platform and one area they can improve on is having the ability to work with SaaS solutions."

"The older version of the solution will no longer be supported."

"Process Orchestration doesn't provide authentication for data sent to us, meaning we have to rely on client certificate-based or basic authentication."

"The responsiveness of technical support needs to be improved."

"SAP should improve the user interface, as it often lacks modern features and aesthetic appeal."

"SAP Process Orchestration could improve from an API standpoint. This is not an API management tool, which is one of its drawbacks. However, SAP has released an SAP Cloud Platform Integration which has all of the features, such as API management along with process integration to replace what they had previously."

More SAP Process Orchestration cons

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

"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."

"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."

"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."

"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."

"On the monitoring side of things, the UI for monitoring could be improved. It's a bit cumbersome to work with."

"The interface needs some work. It is not very user-friendly."

"The patching of infrastructure is not very smooth and improved authentication should be added in the next feature."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of SAP Process Orchestration was reasonable."

"It is a very expensive solution. We only pay for the license."

"It's not an expensive solution."

"The product is not a low-priced solution, but I can say that it is competitively priced in the market."

"Normally, you will have to choose CPU-based licensing...I rate the tool price a five out of ten."

"The license is a one-time payment, and additional costs are only incurred on the infrastructure side since it's an on-premise solution."

"Looking at market conditions, vendors nowadays are giving products at very low price levels. However, SAP Process Orchestration have not yet reduced their prices. The prices could be reduced a lot to stay competitive."

"The solution is highly-priced."

More SAP Process Orchestration pricing and cost advice

"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."

"It is worth the cost."

"I would like to see better pricing for the license."

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

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

"The pricing is a yearly license."

"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."

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

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business-to-Business Middleware solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

837,501 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

18%

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Energy/Utilities Company

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SAP Process Orchestration?

It provides essential features such as continuous monitoring of all interfaces are crucial for our needs.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SAP Process Orchestration?

The main concern is the cost. If additional help is needed due to lack of skill, we have to pay for SAP support.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SAP Process Orchestration?

There are two main areas for improvement: performance and cost. The cost is quite high, and if it were reduced, it might also improve the performance, potentially allowing us to access a more effic...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?

webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.

See all answers

Comparisons

SAP Data Services vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 18% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 15% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 12% of the time

IBM App Connect vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 6% of the time

Workato vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 5% of the time

More SAP Process Orchestration Competitors

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

SAP Cloud Platform vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

Kong Gateway Enterprise vs webMethods.io

Compared 2% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

SAP Process Orchestration

January 2025

Download SAP Process Orchestration product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

January 2025

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

SAP NetWeaver Process Integration, NetWeaver Process Integration

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

Overview

SAP NetWeaver Process Integration facilitates the integration of business processes that span different departments, organizations, or companies. SAP PI is based on general standards so as to enable 3rd-party systems to be integrated. At the center of SAP PI is an XML-based communication that uses HTTP (Hyper Text Transfer Protocol). Irrespective of the scenario used, the application-specific contents are transferred in messages in user-defined XML eXtensible Markup Language) from the sender to the receiver either via the Integration Server, or directly between the systems involved. SAP PI can be installed in different ways: Dual usage type installation: Based on both AS ABAP and AS Java. and Advanced Adapter Engine Extended (AEX): Based on AS Java only.

SAP

webMethods.io Integration is a powerful integration platform as a service (iPaaS) that provides a combination of capabilities offered by ESBs, data integration systems, API management tools, and B2B gateways.

IBM

Sample Customers

Lenovo, Dansk Supermarked A/S, Ego Pharmaceuticals Pty. Ltd, Kaeser Kompressoren

Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings

Buyer's Guide

SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io

February 2025

Free Report: SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

837,501 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best Business-to-Business Middleware vendors and best Cloud Data Integration vendors.

We monitor all Business-to-Business Middleware reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.