Tyk vs webMethods.io comparison

"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 is a good product for API management."

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

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

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

"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."

"One of the most important features is that it gives you the possibility to do low-level integration. It provides a lot of features out of the box, and over the years, it has matured so much that any problem that is there in the market can be solved with this product. We can meet any requirements through customizations, transformations, or the logic that needs to be put in. Some of the other products struggle in this aspect. They cannot do things in a certain way, or they have a product limitation, whereas, with webMethods, I have never faced this kind of problem."

"The product is very stable."

"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."

"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."

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

"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."

"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."

"I'd like to see the admin portal for managing the integration server go up a level, to have more capabilities and to be given a more modern web interface."

"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."

"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."

"One area that needs improvement is the version upgrade process. Many customers I've worked with encounter challenges when transitioning from their current version, such as x or 9, to a newer version. The process is not smooth, and they must shift their entire website."

"This is a great solution and the vendor could improve the marketing of the solution to be able to reach more clients."

"We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."

"Sometimes we don't have a very clear idea what the licensing will entail at first, because it can be very customizable. On one hand, this can be a good thing, because it can be tailored to a specific customer's needs. But on the other hand it can also be an issue when some customer asks, "What's the cost?" and we can't yet give them an accurate answer."

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

"Based on our team discussions and feedback, it is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."

"The product is very expensive."

"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."