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

StreamSets vs webMethods.io 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

StreamSets
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (15th)
webMethods.io
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), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Featured Reviews

Nantabo Jackie - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplified pipelines and helped us break down data silos within our organization
The design experience when implementing batch streaming or ECL pipelines is very easy and straightforward. When we initially attempted to integrate StreamSets with Kafka, it was somewhat challenging until we consulted the documentation, after which it became straightforward. We use StreamSets to move data into modern analytics platforms. Moving the data into modern analytics platforms is still complex. It requires a lot of understanding of logic. StreamSets enables us to build data pipelines without knowing how to code. StreamSets' ability to build data pipelines without requiring us to know complex programming is very important, as it allows us to focus on our projects without spending time writing code. StreamSets' Transformer for Snowflake is simple to use for designing both simple and complex transformation logic. StreamSets' Transformer for Snowflake is extremely important to me as it helps me to connect external data sources and keep my internal workflow organized. Transformer for Snowflake's functionality is a perfect ten out of ten. It is important and cost-effective that Transformer for Snowflake is a serverless engine embedded within the platform, as without this feature, it would be very expensive. This feature helps us to sell at lower budget costs, which would otherwise be at a high cost with other servers. StreamSets has helped improve our organization. StreamSets simplified pipelines for our organization. It is easier to complete a project when we know where and how to start, and working with the team remotely makes it more efficient. This helps us to save time and be more organized when creating data pipelines. Being a structured company that produces reliable resources for our application benefits both our clients and contacts. StreamSets' built-in data drift resilience plays a part in our ETL operations. With prior knowledge, the built-in data drift resilience is very effective, but it can be challenging to implement without the preexisting knowledge. The built-in data drift resilience reduced the time it takes us to fix data drift breakages by 45 percent. StreamSets helped us break down data silos within our organization. The use of StreamSets to break down data silos enabled us to be confident in the services and products we provide, as well as the real-time streaming we offer. This has had a positive impact on our business, as it allowed us to accurately determine the analytics we need to present to stakeholders, clients, and our sources while ensuring that the process is secure and transparent. StreamSets saved us time because anyone can use StreamSets not just developers. We can save around 40 percent of our time. StreamSets' reusable assets helped us reduce workload by around 25 percent. StreamSets saved us money by not having to hire developers with specialized skills. We saved around $2,000 US. StreamSets helped us scale our data operations. Since StreamSets makes it easy to scale our data operations, it enabled us to know exactly where to start at any time. We are aware of the timeline for completing the project, and depending on our familiarity with the software, we can come up with a solution quickly.
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 Ease of configuration for pipes is amazing. It has a lot of connectors. Mainly, we can do everything with the data in the pipe. I really like the graphical interface too"
"I have used Data Collector, Transformer, and Control Hub products from StreamSets. What I really like about these products is that they're very user-friendly. People who are not from a technological or core development background find it easy to get started and build data pipelines and connect to the databases. They would be comfortable like any technical person within a couple of weeks."
"For me, the most valuable features in StreamSets have to be the Data Collector and Control Hub, but especially the Data Collector. That feature is very elegant and seamlessly works with numerous source systems."
"Also, the intuitive canvas for designing all the streams in the pipeline, along with the simplicity of the entire product are very big pluses for me. The software is very simple and straightforward. That is something that is needed right now."
"The ETL capabilities are very useful for us. We extract and transform data from multiple data sources, into a single, consistent data store, and then we put it in our systems. We typically use it to connect our Apache Kafka with data lakes. That process is smooth and saves us a lot of time in our production systems."
"I really appreciate the numerous ready connectors available on both the source and target sides, the support for various media file formats, and the ease of configuring and managing pipelines centrally."
"The most valuable feature is the pipelines because they enable us to pull in and push out data from different sources and to manipulate and clean things up within them."
"What I love the most is that StreamSets is very light. It's a containerized application. It's easy to use with Docker. If you are a large organization, it's very easy to use Kubernetes."
"High throughput and excellent scalability."
"The synchronous and asynchronous messaging system the solution provides is very good."
"It's easy to construct new interfaces like apps and client portals."
"The orchestration aspects of APIs, the integration capabilities, and the logging functionalities were the most critical features of our workflow."
"There's hardware, software and application integration, providing hosting flexibility."
"How simple it is to create new solutions."
"The ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong."
"The solution is scalable."
 

Cons

"We create pipelines or jobs in StreamSets Control Hub. It is a great feature, but if there is a way to have a folder structure or organize the pipelines and jobs in Control Hub, it would be great. I submitted a ticket for this some time back."
"They need to improve their customer care services. Sometimes it has taken more than 48 hours to resolve an issue. That should be reduced. They are aware of small or generic issues, but not the more technical or deep issues. For those, they require some time, generally 48 to 72 hours to respond. That should be improved."
"The software is very good overall. Areas for improvement are the error logging and the version history. I would like to see better, more detailed error logging information."
"There aren't enough hands-on labs, and debugging is also an issue because it takes a lot of time. Logs are not that clear when you are debugging, and you can only select a single source for a pipeline."
"StreamSet works great for batch processing but we are looking for something that is more real-time. We need latency in numbers below milliseconds."
"I would like to see it integrate with other kinds of platforms, other than Java. We're going to have a lot of applications using .NET and other languages or frameworks. StreamSets is very helpful for the old Java platform but it's hard to integrate with the other platforms and frameworks."
"In terms of the product, I don't think there is any room for improvement because it is very good. One small area of improvement that is very much needed is on the knowledge base side. Sometimes, it is not very clear how to set up a certain process or a certain node for a person who's using the platform for the first time."
"Visualization and monitoring need to be improved and refined."
"Rules engine processes and BPM processes should be improved."
"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."
"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."
"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."
"The solution should include REST API calls."
"For code version control, you need to use some external software."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is affordable for any business."
"Its pricing is pretty much up to the mark. For smaller enterprises, it could be a big price to pay at the initial stage of operations, but the moment you have the Seed B or Seed C funding and you want to scale up your operations and aren't much worried about the funds, at that point in time, you would need a solution that could be scaled."
"We are running the community version right now, which can be used free of charge."
"The licensing is expensive, and there are other costs involved too. I know from using the software that you have to buy new features whenever there are new updates, which I don't really like. But initially, it was very good."
"There are two editions, Professional and Enterprise, and there is a free trial. We're using the Professional edition and it is competitively priced."
"The overall cost is very flexible so it is not a burden for our organization... However, the cost should be improved. For small and mid-size organizations it might be a challenge."
"The pricing is too fixed. It should be based on how much data you need to process. Some businesses are not so big that they process a lot of data."
"StreamSets Data Collector is open source. One can utilize the StreamSets Data Collector, but the Control Hub is the main repository where all the jobs are present. Everything happens in Control Hub."
"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is too high."
"I signed a three-year deal with them. It is a yearly locked-in price for the next three years."
"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."
"The price is high and I give it a five out of ten."
"With our current licensing, it's very easy for us to scale. With our older licensing model, it was very hard. This is definitely something that I would highlight."
"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."
"The product is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about StreamSets?
The best thing about StreamSets is its plugins, which are very useful and work well with almost every data source. It's also easy to use, especially if you're comfortable with SQL. You can customiz...
What needs improvement with StreamSets?
We often faced problems, especially with SAP ERP. We struggled because many columns weren't integers or primary keys, which StreamSets couldn't handle. We had to restructure our data tables, which ...
What is your primary use case for StreamSets?
StreamSets is used for data transformation rather than ETL processes. It focuses on transforming data directly from sources without handling the extraction part of the process. The transformed data...
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

Availity, BT Group, Humana, Deluxe, GSK, RingCentral, IBM, Shell, SamTrans, State of Ohio, TalentFulfilled, TechBridge
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about StreamSets vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.