We performed a comparison between 3scale API Management and Kong Gateway Enterprise based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product is stable."
"The standard deployment is very simple."
"The most valuable features are the gateway and security features."
"To me, the most valuable feature of 3scale API Management is that it lets you add a backend to the product. I also like that you can integrate it well with OpenShift clusters, making 3scale API Management a useful solution."
"The solution is quite lightweight, and the installation is very easy. It's like a two-click installation."
"3scale API Management's best feature is API management."
"The gateway is the most valuable feature because it makes it possible for us to gather all traffic into one proxy, which is a good thing."
"I like the API automation."
"It boasts remarkable speed and stability, and these qualities, particularly the gateway's resilience, are standout features for me."
"Good at intercepting traffic and modeling APIs around that."
"The route limiting feature is very valuable."
"The most valuable features of Kong Enterprise are the out-of-the-box open source easy functionality."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it seamlessly supports a vast number of tools."
"The solution provides good performance."
"This is a solid intrusion prevention system that combines a firewall and antivirus in a single solution."
"The tool's feature that I find most beneficial is rate limiting. In our usage, especially in the financial sector, we prioritize limiting API usage. This is crucial because we provide APIs to other companies and must ensure they adhere to their allocated usage limits. Without rate limiting, there's a risk of excessive usage, which could result in significant costs."
"The product is not that flexible for developers. It's less flexible and rigid. It's not easy to make changes or customize it."
"The user experience could be better. The developer portal is too complex and hard to configure."
"What I'd like to improve in 3scale API Management is its route-limiting feature. Currently, I don't know how to do that effectively on the solution, but in Kong, I know how to do it, so I would love to see route-limiting being easily done on 3scale API Management. It would also be good if there was some authentication that you could do from 3scale API Management because Kong offers that functionality out of the box. What I'd love to see in the next release of 3scale API Management is the ability to integrate more plug-ins easily onto the platform, so you'll be able to extend it, and even do customs management. If Red Hat could offer that extension where it allows the internal organization where 3scale API Management is deployed on-premise to integrate its tools on top of 3scale API Management and provide an API for that, that will make the solution very powerful."
"3scale API Management only supports restful APIs and doesn't support SOAP."
"It would be helpful to improve the customization features so that the customer can do it based on their own needs."
"I believe the CMS part of it has room for improvement though. That is where you write a couple of things if you want to publish your API. It's based on liquid scripting, which doesn't seem like the obvious ones to script with."
"What was suggested by Red Hat was a crucial part of the configuration, but when we started to ask about the supportability of this configuration, Red Hat said only some parts of the configuration would be supported."
"We tried to use the portal, but we decided that it wasn't enough. The content management system (CMS) is not easy to use if you want to customize things, and it's hard to get someone who has the knowledge to work with the CMS."
"Kong is meant for north-south communications, so it will be interesting to see what solutions they can come up with in the realms of east-west communications, service-to-service communications, and Zero Trust architecture. I believe that if they can provide for these areas, then they will be able to solve the overall integration and security concerns for microservices architecture in general."
"Understanding the configurations and knowing what needs to be done can be a bit difficult initially."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Kong Enterprise needs to improve its pricing, which starts at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Pricing should be based on API usage rather than monthly. It should improve its documentation as well."
"The developer portal needs to be improved."
"Kong Enterprise fails to provide live tracing of the APIs, which is possible nowadays."
"It becomes difficult if you try to scale it up to multiple clusters."
"They could focus more on pricing."
3scale API Management is ranked 11th in API Management with 10 reviews while Kong Gateway Enterprise is ranked 6th in API Management with 18 reviews. 3scale API Management is rated 7.4, while Kong Gateway Enterprise is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of 3scale API Management writes "Useful as it lets you add a backend to the product, it integrates well with clusters, and it has exceptional technical support, but route-limiting isn't easy to do on it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kong Gateway Enterprise writes "Provides role-based access control and can be easily customized with Lua script". 3scale API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, IBM API Connect, WSO2 API Manager and Microsoft Azure API Management, whereas Kong Gateway Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, WSO2 API Manager, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and IBM API Connect. See our 3scale API Management vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management 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.
