AWS AppSync vs webMethods.io comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and IBM are both solutions in the Cloud Data Integration category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.0, while IBM is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.0. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 0.6% mindshare in CDI, compared to IBM’s 5.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

AWS AppSync

Read 2 AWS AppSync reviews

376 Views
188 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 93 webMethods.io reviews

9,371 Views
1,312 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

AWS AppSync

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AWS AppSync and webMethods.io based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS AppSync vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

AWS AppSync vs. webMethods.io

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 peers since 2012

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

AWS AppSync

Ranking in Cloud Data Integration

23rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

webMethods.io

Ranking in Cloud Data Integration

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (9th), API Management (10th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (4th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of AWS AppSync is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 5.0%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Data Integration

Featured Reviews

Akil Saji

AWS Cloud Developer at Mobil80 Solutions and Services Pvt. Ltd.

Ease of creating APIs with ongoing updates needed for automation

AWS has made it easy for developers like me to create and manage GraphQL APIs. The ease of use is a main advantage, allowing even beginners to start from scratch and learn through AppSync. Before AWS, developing and managing APIs was quite complex. AWS provided AppSync, which assists developers and startup founders. Startups blooming everywhere benefit from this service, welcoming those who lack prior knowledge. When working on AWS, I notice that Amazon regularly implements new features. For instance, with the Lambda service, AWS is transitioning from an old editor to a new one. Similarly, AppSync frequently introduces updates and changes. This trend is making the user interface more accessible, even for individuals without a technical background. Additionally, the cost is attractive, as AWS operates on a pay-as-you-go basis. These factors make AppSync both easy to use and cost-effective.

Read full review

MohanPrasad

Senior Consultant at Brillio

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…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AWS has made it easy for developers like me to create and manage GraphQL APIs."

"Support for multiple data sources and formats is a fantastic feature."

"AWS has made it easy for developers like me to create and manage GraphQL APIs."

"The synchronous and asynchronous messaging system the solution provides is very good."

"It's easy to construct new interfaces like apps and client portals."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a good solution for interacting with outside of the organization. We can integrate the solutions with multiple outside the organization."

"The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation."

"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."

"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."

"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."

"The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"Moving to other clouds is impossible without significantly rearchitecting your applications."

"In AppSync, assigning roles and permissions to APIs is necessary for accessing other AWS services. Automating this task when creating APIs would be beneficial."

"Upgrades are complex. They typically take about five months from start to finish. There are many packages that plug into webMethods Integration Server, which is the central point for a vast majority of the transactions at my organization. Anytime we are upgrading that, there are complexities within each component that we must understand. That makes any upgrade very cumbersome and complicated. That has been my experience at this company. Because there are many different business units that we are touching, there are so many different components that we are touching. The amount of READMEs that you have to go through takes some time."

"The deployment should be simplified."

"A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility."

"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."

"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."

"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."

"Some of the things that we use cannot be done in this solution. For these things, we have to either use a Java service or a util service. There is no predefined or existing service that we can use. So, we have to work on the util service and write on top of it. Its price can also be better. It is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis, and it is a pay-as-you-go model."

"It is worth the cost."

"webMethods.io Integration's pricing is high and has yearly subscription costs."

"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."

"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."

"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."

"The vendor is flexible with respect to pricing."

"The solution’s pricing is too high."

"The product is expensive."

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS AppSync?

We initially had limited knowledge about AWS costs. As beginners, we ran many instances for over a month. Consequently, we received a bill from Amazon for around $20, which was unexpected. This hig...

See all answers

What needs improvement with AWS AppSync?

In AppSync, assigning roles and permissions to APIs is necessary for accessing other AWS services. Automating this task when creating APIs would be beneficial. Regular updates might soon address th...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for AWS AppSync?

Our company handles in-house projects and serves clients globally. My role with AppSync involves creating GraphQL APIs. There are different types of APIs, such as REST API, GraphQL API, and WebSock...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?

webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.

See all answers

Comparisons

AWS Glue vs AWS AppSync

Compared 40% of the time

Zapier vs AWS AppSync

Compared 33% of the time

Workato vs AWS AppSync

Compared 28% of the time

More AWS AppSync Competitors

IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 6% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs webMethods.io

Compared 6% of the time

Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Data Integration

August 2025

Download AWS AppSync product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

July 2025

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

AppSync

Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API

Overview

AWS AppSync simplifies application development by letting you create a flexible API to securely access, manipulate, and combine data from one or more data sources. AppSync is a managed service that uses GraphQL to make it easy for applications to get exactly the data they need.

With AppSync, you can build scalable applications, including those requiring real-time updates, on a range of data sources such as NoSQL data stores, relational databases, HTTP APIs, and your custom data sources with AWS Lambda. For mobile and web apps, AppSync additionally provides local data access when devices go offline, and data synchronization with customizable conflict resolution, when they are back online.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

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.

IBM

Sample Customers

ACBL, Puresec, IDT, ASU, Public Good, cookpad, ALDO, ticketmaster

Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings

Buyer's Guide

AWS AppSync vs. webMethods.io

July 2025

Free Report: AWS AppSync vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS AppSync vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our AWS AppSync vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors and best Cloud Data Integration vendors.

We monitor all Cloud 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.