Developer at a hospitality company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Nov 12, 2025
Many things are evolving with the AI buzz in the market. What I would like to see improved or enhanced in webMethods.io in the future is that since webMethods.io is already under IBM, I think IBM will introduce and integrate AI into it. Additionally, regarding what webMethods.io can improve is the license cost. Other cloud players are also providing the same kind of functionality, such as AWS and Azure. webMethods.io is being installed on-premises, but AWS is providing it directly in the cloud. When comparing the license cost and request per minute cost, webMethods.io needs to address that. There are many competitors in the market for this.
webMethods.io lacks advanced monitoring and analytics capabilities, so my customers need to use something additional. Regarding the aspect of monitoring and analytics in webMethods.io, I wouldn't say it needs improvement; it was made for webMethods.io components, processes, and integration points. However, it cannot integrate with external services such as Apigee from Google for monitoring those web services in webMethods.io. You can monitor the calls between you and Apigee, but not the other calls to Apigee. Other platforms exist solely for these purposes, providing overall monitoring of applications and processes used by NOC departments. In terms of areas in webMethods.io I would want to see improved in future releases, I think mainly the performance would be a focus, but the features already cover most if not all needs of integration. I've noticed components made to integrate with SAP and Oracle, but new applications in the market, such as ServiceNow, are booming. It would be good to have a separate component to cover integration and functionality for ServiceNow. Another enhancement would be in OCR; currently, there is a huge demand for OCR capabilities. It would be perfect if webMethods.io had a built-in component for OCR, as this would be tested and allow customers to use it better than a third-party OCR application. Having such a feature is essentially basic in modern applications.
Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us. We have been with Software AG and now IBM for a long time, over 25 years. A special discount of at least 50% for old customers would allow us to expand our services and request more resources.
The licensing cost is high compared to other options. Additionally, AI support could be improved. Overall, the features are good, but the high cost could be a limiting factor.
As it is a mature product, I don't see the need for a lot of improvements. The solution is increasing and bringing more and more areas of compliance into the picture. I think the tool is compliant to meet the standards, especially in terms of, health compliance, fintech compliance, or PCI compliance system by enterprise or API compliant. In the area of compliance, the tool is improving and getting more accelerators. The tool has been improving a few things, and making it better. I think that webMethods API Gateway is getting acquired by IBM. I don't see any challenges attached to the product. Lately, webMethods API Gateway got introduced as a separate product. Initially, there was a more web service approach, after which webMethods API Gateway moved to the REST approach to meet the industry standards, providing the product more flexibility. The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.
Readiness Manager/Business Analytics for GCC India Operations at Ericsson
Real User
Feb 12, 2024
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. If I am part of the consultancy company, I could propose taking on the version upgrade process as a separate project. From the company's perspective, this upgrade could vary in duration depending on the complexity of the business, ranging from six months to a year. This extended timeframe poses a significant challenge for customers due to the competition. From a cost perspective, getting the money for the upgrade project can be challenging for customers.
Integration Delivery Lead at a tech consulting company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Jan 30, 2024
Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area. It's very good as a standalone integration server, but it has to come up with more features in the cloud. The solution's API management is slightly lagging, and its API policies could be improved.
The main reason my company decided to replace webMethods.io Integration is because of the integration capabilities in the newer versions of the tool. Whenever there is a new version of webMethods.io Integrations, there is a lot of work to be done by our company since the newer versions don't offer seamless integration. The aforementioned reason can be considered for improvement in webMethods.io Integrations. With the solution, our company has experienced sudden outages at times. The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required. Not just the cost related to licensing but also the cost of introducing new versions need improvement in the product. When you have an OS like Windows or Apple, in which some new features are installed when you restart your system, after which everything works fine, with webMethods.io Integration, the new features introduced in the tool don't just need you to stop and restart your application but expects you to update the whole application to be able to use the new functionalities, which is something that is good. My company does a business in which we have to create a complete project which costs a lot of money. In the future, I expect to not be paying a lot of money or extra work to be able to update the product, and webMethods.io Integration needs to update the product automatically.
A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility. This becomes evident when dealing with diverse products within a client's portfolio, requiring significant time and resources for API integration. The challenge lies in the need for a robust team and cost optimization to bridge the gap between legacy systems and modern API standards. Additionally, the time and effort involved in transforming products into API-ready formats can be a limiting factor. While the platform offers comprehensive solutions, addressing these challenges requires careful consideration and a modular approach for optimal results.
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.
Many things are evolving with the AI buzz in the market. What I would like to see improved or enhanced in webMethods.io in the future is that since webMethods.io is already under IBM, I think IBM will introduce and integrate AI into it. Additionally, regarding what webMethods.io can improve is the license cost. Other cloud players are also providing the same kind of functionality, such as AWS and Azure. webMethods.io is being installed on-premises, but AWS is providing it directly in the cloud. When comparing the license cost and request per minute cost, webMethods.io needs to address that. There are many competitors in the market for this.
webMethods.io lacks advanced monitoring and analytics capabilities, so my customers need to use something additional. Regarding the aspect of monitoring and analytics in webMethods.io, I wouldn't say it needs improvement; it was made for webMethods.io components, processes, and integration points. However, it cannot integrate with external services such as Apigee from Google for monitoring those web services in webMethods.io. You can monitor the calls between you and Apigee, but not the other calls to Apigee. Other platforms exist solely for these purposes, providing overall monitoring of applications and processes used by NOC departments. In terms of areas in webMethods.io I would want to see improved in future releases, I think mainly the performance would be a focus, but the features already cover most if not all needs of integration. I've noticed components made to integrate with SAP and Oracle, but new applications in the market, such as ServiceNow, are booming. It would be good to have a separate component to cover integration and functionality for ServiceNow. Another enhancement would be in OCR; currently, there is a huge demand for OCR capabilities. It would be perfect if webMethods.io had a built-in component for OCR, as this would be tested and allow customers to use it better than a third-party OCR application. Having such a feature is essentially basic in modern applications.
Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us. We have been with Software AG and now IBM for a long time, over 25 years. A special discount of at least 50% for old customers would allow us to expand our services and request more resources.
The licensing cost is high compared to other options. Additionally, AI support could be improved. Overall, the features are good, but the high cost could be a limiting factor.
As it is a mature product, I don't see the need for a lot of improvements. The solution is increasing and bringing more and more areas of compliance into the picture. I think the tool is compliant to meet the standards, especially in terms of, health compliance, fintech compliance, or PCI compliance system by enterprise or API compliant. In the area of compliance, the tool is improving and getting more accelerators. The tool has been improving a few things, and making it better. I think that webMethods API Gateway is getting acquired by IBM. I don't see any challenges attached to the product. Lately, webMethods API Gateway got introduced as a separate product. Initially, there was a more web service approach, after which webMethods API Gateway moved to the REST approach to meet the industry standards, providing the product more flexibility. The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.
webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.
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. If I am part of the consultancy company, I could propose taking on the version upgrade process as a separate project. From the company's perspective, this upgrade could vary in duration depending on the complexity of the business, ranging from six months to a year. This extended timeframe poses a significant challenge for customers due to the competition. From a cost perspective, getting the money for the upgrade project can be challenging for customers.
Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area. It's very good as a standalone integration server, but it has to come up with more features in the cloud. The solution's API management is slightly lagging, and its API policies could be improved.
The main reason my company decided to replace webMethods.io Integration is because of the integration capabilities in the newer versions of the tool. Whenever there is a new version of webMethods.io Integrations, there is a lot of work to be done by our company since the newer versions don't offer seamless integration. The aforementioned reason can be considered for improvement in webMethods.io Integrations. With the solution, our company has experienced sudden outages at times. The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required. Not just the cost related to licensing but also the cost of introducing new versions need improvement in the product. When you have an OS like Windows or Apple, in which some new features are installed when you restart your system, after which everything works fine, with webMethods.io Integration, the new features introduced in the tool don't just need you to stop and restart your application but expects you to update the whole application to be able to use the new functionalities, which is something that is good. My company does a business in which we have to create a complete project which costs a lot of money. In the future, I expect to not be paying a lot of money or extra work to be able to update the product, and webMethods.io Integration needs to update the product automatically.
The patching of infrastructure is not very smooth and improved authentication should be added in the next feature.
A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility. This becomes evident when dealing with diverse products within a client's portfolio, requiring significant time and resources for API integration. The challenge lies in the need for a robust team and cost optimization to bridge the gap between legacy systems and modern API standards. Additionally, the time and effort involved in transforming products into API-ready formats can be a limiting factor. While the platform offers comprehensive solutions, addressing these challenges requires careful consideration and a modular approach for optimal results.
The solution could be improved in the VTA part. The solution should include REST API calls.
Perhaps in the area of Microservices, where I think Trading Networks could benefit from some improvements.