We performed a comparison between SAS Data Management and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is very stable. We haven't faced any issues with glitches or bugs. We haven't had any crashes."
"In terms of which features I have found most valuable, I would say the importing and exporting features. Additionally, the data sorting, categorizing and summarizing features, especially how it can summarize based on categories. These are the key features."
"Its robustness is valuable. It is a full-fledged suite. We have a data warehouse model, and there are also a lot of data quality management tools. The repository and all other tools are there. So, it is a full package in terms of reporting tools."
"The tool is reliable, quick, and powerful."
"The technical support is excellent."
"The product offers very good flexibility."
"This is an established product with powerful data analysis and varied options for user entry points."
"I am impressed with the tool's ability to customize."
"Given that you have one integration API in place, it takes very minimal effort to scale it to any other application that might want to use the same. Its flow-based development environment is a breeze and makes it really easy to re-use most of the existing components and build up a new API."
"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"Application integration, business process integration, and B2B partner integration are valuable. But among these, I feel B2B partner integration is the most valuable. This module integrates two business partners and exchanges data through electronic data interchange messages in the form of specific standards, without any manual process needed."
"It has a good integration server, designer, and a very good API portal."
"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."
"It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career."
"Broker and UM are the best features."
"I would like the tool to include the ability to automate the modifications of the integrations."
"We find we often have to go back and re-train users when there are changes made to the solution because the changes are not intuitive."
"The pricing of the solution needs to be improved. They need to work to make it more affordable."
"We implemented it a while ago, and we are trying to improve the data delivery performance. We are looking into how to get faster and automated reporting. We would need better designs and workflows."
"The solution is quite expensive and hard to install/configure."
"The solution could use better documentation."
"Very little needs to improve but perhaps a nicer graphic interface and remaining competetive in the growing field of data analytics."
"One problem is accessing the data using a solution other than SAS. The SAS data, which we create in the SAS, cannot be accessed by other tools. We can't open those data in other applications. So we need to have that application in place."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."
"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."
"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."
"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."
"The certifications and learning resources are not exposed openly enough. For instance, they have a trial version which comes with only a few basic features, and I think that community-wise they need to offer more free or open spaces where developers can feel encouraged to experiment."
"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
SAS Data Management is ranked 43rd in Data Integration with 15 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. SAS Data Management is rated 8.4, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of SAS Data Management writes "A scalable solution with customer support that is responsive and diligent". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". SAS Data Management is most compared with Informatica PowerCenter, Tungsten RPA, Microsoft Purview Data Governance, SSIS and IBM InfoSphere DataStage, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi iPaaS. See our SAS Data Management vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
We monitor all Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
