SwaggerHub vs Tyk comparison

"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."

"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."

"The scalability is endless."

"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."

"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."

"It is a stable solution."

"Code generation is one of the important features of SwaggerHub. We design our API, and we can generate a very rich codebase and add to it. The code generation feature is very valuable."

"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."

"You can set up workflows and write limited pieces of logic."

"It is a good product for API management."

"The most valuable feature is the load balancing with the circuit-breaker function."

"The portal for developers that this solution provides has great functionality."

"The feature I find most valuable is that this solution allows us to manage our security."

"The scalability is very good. That was a key factor in the selection, like how it could be pushed to high volume and scalability, which seemed to be very good."

"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."

"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"

"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."

"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."

"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."

"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."

"SwaggerHub lacks in terms of integrations. They have APIs integrated, and they also have some connectors, but they don't have integration with many of the things that we use. For example, for connecting with SVN, we had to implement external scripts. So, they should work on the integration because currently, we have to work on the integration with our DevOps, continuous delivery, or continuous deployment. It would be great if these integrations are built-in. Mainly, we would like it to integrate with SVN and Jira."

"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."

"Sometimes when new features are released, they are not immediately stable."

"It is a young product and does not have the kind of brand recognition that would make it a more popular solution with our clients."

"We would like a better tool for generating documentation for the APIs to be developed."

"We ran it for a while, but then we decided to move away from Tyk, because Tyk's cloud version, the SaaS version, has a significant limitation of limited flexibility, so you can't program very much."

"I would like to see some additional features like having some extensions for .NET core because we use it for our back-end language."

"In terms of our usage, the main area of concern is that they tend to build enhancements slightly ahead of the considerations for what those enhancements and extensions are. So it could be slightly better communication with the customer base that would be my main issue with them."

"It has a yearly subscription, but I am not sure."

"The management considers it a bit expensive. At first, we wanted to purchase a license for 100 users, but we went for a license for only 15 users. Its cost is $10,220 per year."

"The tool is cheap."

"It had a free version, which suited many of our needs, but not all, but we were happy to go ahead with the licensed version as well, which is the paid version."

"There are different versions and plans available depending on the requirements, so there is flexibility in terms of the pricing."

"The cost curve is far smoother, both in terms of volume and the number of calls it's running on, compared to most competitors. So it's a tad more expensive at the very low end, but the curve is nothing like Apigee or some of the others."

"The price is low compared to other products of a similar type."

"We are using the open-source version of this product, so there are no licensing costs for its use."