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

WSO2 Enterprise Integrator vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

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

webMethods.io
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
WSO2 Enterprise Integrator
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (25th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of webMethods.io is 10.5%, up from 9.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is 4.9%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Ritesh_Shah - PeerSpot reviewer
Decreases the development timeframe and costs
The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for easy integration with third-party systems. Often, customers decide to develop using open-source tools like Spring Boot if there aren't many connectors required to avoid increasing costs. They'll develop this way and then deploy using APIM, the bare minimum needed. It is mainly required for very complicated setups with many connectors. In the implementations I've seen, people often used open-source tools because there weren't many third-party systems involved—just their organization's own systems. From WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, I expect them to bring up more and more connectors in the future. That's the main expectation. Having more connectors in various areas will help us when discussing new requirements. I don't have any specific use case right now, so I can't name a particular connector. But, as new technologies emerge, the relevant connectors should be there for those. WSO2 Enterprise Integrator mainly helps with the integration part, which can be simplified only if you have relevant connectors for whatever you're doing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"When it comes to the user interface, I'm already really used to it. I cannot say anything against it. For me, it's easy to use."
"It is a very stable product."
"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."
"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"The orchestration aspects of APIs, the integration capabilities, and the logging functionalities were the most critical features of our workflow."
"webMethods Trading Networks is a stable solution."
"The installation process is easy."
"It's a consolidated product. It works and it does its job pretty well."
"The productivity is the most valuable feature. It is very easy to write remediations."
"The solution's customer service is good."
"The learning curve for this solution is very good."
"The solution has two main parts: integration and transformation. It's very user-friendly and easy to understand for everyone."
"Currently, I find the configuration part quite valuable, where you can easily configure things."
"The solution basically conforms to our standards."
 

Cons

"I would like to see the price improve."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."
"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."
"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"
"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."
"I would like to see them bring back a feature, from earlier versions, that was very useful in debugging and finding issues."
"The setup can be difficult for those not familiar with the solution."
"One of the reasons that we are looking for a replacement is their way of defining integration. The language of the XML structures that I use to describe the integrations are not that standard, and it's not easy to find people who are familiar with this approach."
"The micro integrator should be improved. There is room for enhancement considering alternative integration components."
"The customization can be a bit difficult."
"The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it."
"WSO2 libraries are not mature enough. For example, if you want to integrate with Kafka using its Kafka library, it often has many bugs."
"You cannot include the validation of XPath."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a yearly license."
"It is expensive, but we reached a good agreement with the company. It is still a little bit expensive, but we got a better deal than the previous one."
"Currently, the licensing solution for this product is pretty straightforward. The way that Software AG has moved in their licensing agreements is very understandable. It is very easy for you to see where things land. Like most vendors today, they are transaction based. Therefore, just having a good understanding of how many transactions that you are doing a year would be very wise. Luckily, there are opportunities to work with the vendor to get a good understanding of how many transactions you have and what is the right limit for you to fall under."
"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
"It is worth the cost."
"I don’t have much idea about prices, but webMethods API Portal is not something cheaper."
"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."
"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."
"The pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software."
"The cost is better than IBM Cloud Pak."
"It is a low-cost solution."
"I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge."
"The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
26%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Real Estate/Law Firm
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What do you like most about WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
WSO2's analytics capability is good, considering the ELC support they provide.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
The product has reasonable and competitive pricing for enterprise customers. It is expensive for small businesses especially. They are using the open-source solution, and they find it expensive sin...
What needs improvement with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for e...
 

Also Known As

Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
West
Find out what your peers are saying about WSO2 Enterprise Integrator vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.