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

Apache APISIX vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Apache APISIX
Ranking in API Management
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in API Management
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (9th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Apache APISIX is 3.5%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.5%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

AB
User-friendly platform simplifies traffic management and boosts API management through integrated plugins
The most valuable features of Apache APISIX include routing for upstream and frontend services, masking using proxy rewrite, and the integration of different plugins like Prometheus and Grafana. These plugins are self-integrated, allowing features like JWT authentication, rate limiting, and diverse authentication methods without extra integration. The tool is beneficial for its plugin orchestration which enhances API management with redirection, response rewrite, key authentication, and observability with Grafana and Prometheus.
MohanPrasad - PeerSpot reviewer
Smooth integration and enhanced deployment with high licensing cost
webMethods.io was used to integrate APIs through the webMethods.io platform, trigger database events, and connect backend APIs through a Java backend. It was used extensively for integration purposes in my organization Integration became smoother, troubleshooting was easier, and deployment and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I recommend Apache APISIX to others because of its many useful features."
"The most valuable features of Apache APISIX include routing for upstream and frontend services, masking using proxy rewrite, and the integration of different plugins like Prometheus and Grafana."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"​Broker and UM are the best features."
"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"
"From a user perspective, the feature which I like the most about Integration Server is its designer."
"The synchronous and asynchronous messaging system the solution provides is very good."
"The product supports various types of digital documents, including XMLs and EDI."
"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."
 

Cons

"The user interface is limited and does not support all features of Apache APISIX."
"The routing algorithms in Apache APISIX, such as node-based and round-robin, could be improved. Introducing more plugins and supporting AI features can enhance the solution."
"Version control is not very easy. The packages and the integration server are on Eclipse IDE, but you can't compare the code from the IDE. For example, if you are working on Java code, doing version control and deployment for a quick comparison between the code isn't easy. Some tools or plug-ins are there, such as CrossVista, and you can also play with an SVN server where you have to place your package, and from there, you can check, but you have to do that as a separate exercise. You can't do it from the IDE or webMethods server. You can't just right-click and upload your service."
"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."
"The market webMethods Integration Server falls under is a very crowded market, so for the product to stand out, Software AG would need to get traction in the open source community by releasing a new version or a base version and open source it, so people can create new custom components and add it to the portfolio."
"In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate consumption plans and throttle all those consumption plans towards the run time could be better."
"Perhaps in the area of Microservices, where I think Trading Networks could benefit from some improvements."
"The logging capability has room for improvement. That way, we could keep a history of all the transactions. It would be helpful to be able to get to that without having to build a standalone solution to do so."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There are no hidden costs in addition to the standard licensing fees for webMethods. For corporate organizations, it's a very cheap or fairly priced product, but for growing or small businesses, it's quite expensive. These businesses would probably need to consider an enterprise services bus at some point. Thus, from a pricing point, it closes out non-cooperate businesses."
"With our current licensing, it's very easy for us to scale. With our older licensing model, it was very hard. This is definitely something that I would highlight."
"The pricing is a yearly license."
"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."
"Based on our team discussions and feedback, it is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see better pricing for the license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
864,155 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Apache APISIX?
The routing algorithms in Apache APISIX, such as node-based and round-robin, could be improved. Introducing more plugins and supporting AI features can enhance the solution.
What is your primary use case for Apache APISIX?
The primary use case for Apache APISIX is to mask the API endpoints for my microservices and use self-given APIs in Apache APISIX and mask those with the actual real ones. This helps to prevent use...
What advice do you have for others considering Apache APISIX?
I rate Apache APISIX an eight out of ten overall. For new users, I advise going through the official documentation deeply to implement the solution efficiently.
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.
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache APISIX vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
864,155 professionals have used our research since 2012.