We performed a comparison between Apigee and webMethods API Gateway 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.
"We use it to build API proxies for securing targeted back-ends with an emphasis on Continuous Integration/Continuous Development (CI/CD)."
"The tool is one of the earliest API management products and is good. It reduces the Time To Market aspects of products."
"The initial setup isn't too complex."
"Lifecycle management."
"The flexibility allows you to quickly run a cloud-native application architecture."
"We have been using Apigee mostly for proxy FGIs. We also use its security features as well as traffic control features."
"We can customize the dashboard."
"It is scalable."
"In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."
"Within the new version, webMethods API Gateway gives us an end-to-end lifecycle from the creation of the API up into the development, deployment, and promotion into production/live. The current end-to-end lifecycle of the API gives us enough authority and governance of the API. We know what are currently live services, what is in the testing stage of development, and what version that has been commissioned. So, the full life cycle itself gives us full authority and governance of the API."
"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."
"Apigee could do more to make users aware of what is available in the add-ons."
"The solution could add even more functionalities."
"I would like to see better integration and some architectural improvements in future releases of the solution."
"Access restrictions can be improved."
"Technical support model for OPDK should be more exposed and mature in terms of providing support during installation, run, and debug of Apigee in production on OPDK mode."
"The solution’s scalability could be improved."
"As it is now, the rotation of certificates is a manual task and is something that can be improved."
"iPaaS is something that we would like to see. For example, MuleSoft is kind of an integrated platform as a service (iPaaS), and it provides a lot of out-of-the-box connectors and other such things. This is where Apigee lacks. I'm not sure if that's the roadmap for Apigee, but any improvements on those lines would be helpful where things become easier to implement."
"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."
"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."
"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."
"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."
"The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution."
"The price has room for improvement."
"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
Apigee is ranked 2nd in API Management with 82 reviews while webMethods API Gateway is ranked 12th in API Management with 9 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while webMethods API Gateway is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods API Gateway writes "We developed several services in the cloud using a sandbox environment for our last hackathon". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, Amazon API Gateway, WSO2 API Manager and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, whereas webMethods API Gateway is most compared with webMethods.io Integration, Kong Gateway Enterprise, webMethods Microgateway, CentraSite and 3scale API Management. See our Apigee vs. webMethods API Gateway 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.
