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

AWS Database Migration Service vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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 Database Migration Service
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), API Management (10th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of AWS Database Migration Service is 16.8%, up from 15.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 4.6%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Avinash Gangu - PeerSpot reviewer
Centralizing database tables enhances workflow efficiency for ease of use
I was looking for some content as part of a comparison analysis. However, one of the pain points is that it is way too free-flowing. I have to skim through all the security pages to get to the crux of it. I was looking for a table that suggests which facets such services address with proofs of reference from professional conferences. The document is a 63-page read, making it very difficult to navigate without a summary. I was looking for a summary at the start, however, if I have to do it myself, I might as well integrate from AWS Docs and then Informative Exchange. The current document contains a lot of information, which is great, but there needs to be a summary indicating the story's essence. Unless there's a correction, it is not present in the document.
Michele Illiano - PeerSpot reviewer
Can function as an ESB along with the core product, with decent integration of message protocols
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. This is why, for most customers who have to deal with big files, I suggest that they use a product other than ActiveTransfer. I would like to note that this problem mainly concerns large files that undergo extra operations, such assigning, unassigning, or file translation. When these operations take place on large files, ActiveTransfer will use up a lot of resources. Within the product itself, I also believe that there is room for improvement in terms of optimization when it comes to general performance. I suspect that the issues underlying poor optimization are because it is all developed in Java. That is, all the objects and functions that are used need to be better organized, especially when it comes to big files but also overall. webMethods ActiveTransfer was born as an ESB to handle messages, and these messages were typically very short, i.e. small in size. A message is data that you have to send to an application, where it must be received in real-time and possibly processed or acknowledged elsewhere in the system as well. So, because it was initially designed for small messages, it struggles with performance when presented with very large files. All this to say, I suggest that they have an engineer reevaluate the architecture of the product in order to consider cases where large files are sent, and not only small ones. As for new features, compared to other products in the market, I think Software AG should be more up to date when it comes to extra protocol support, especially those protocols that other solutions have included in their products by default. Whenever we need to add an unsupported protocol, we have to go through the effort of custom development in order to work with it. Also, all the banks are obligated to migrate to the new standards, and big companies are all handling translations and operating their libraries with the new protocol formats. But webMethods ActiveTransfer doesn't seem to be keeping up with this evolution. Thus, they should aim to be more compliant in future, along the lines of their competitors such as IBM and Primeur.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's scalable."
"This solution is very good at mini-batch processing."
"Support is helpful."
"DMS's architecture is highly beneficial, allowing for scalable migrations of large datasets."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"Scalable and stable solution for migrating databases to AWS, with valuable features such as parallel full load and continuous data replication."
"As the solution is on the cloud, we don't have to worry about the maintenance of software."
"What I like about AWS Database Migration Service is that it's a good product that allows you to migrate terabytes of data. My team was able to migrate almost 16TB of data using AWS Database Migration Service. The solution works fine for my use case."
"I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods."
"The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved."
"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 product supports various types of digital documents, including XMLs and EDI."
"I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well."
"High throughput and excellent scalability."
"From a user perspective, the feature which I like the most about Integration Server is its designer."
"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.)"
 

Cons

"There are a set of complexities and challenges when a user wants to integrate AWS products with Microsoft products."
"In my experience, AWS Database Migration Service performs well for its primary purpose of data migration. One area that could be improved is its support for non-AWS file formats, particularly when integrating data from sources stored outside of AWS. For example, handling AWS Data Lakes, Delta Lake, or Hadoop file formats stored in S3 requires extensive configuration and isn't always straightforward. It would be beneficial to streamline this process to ensure smoother migrations from non-AWS environments to AWS. As for additional functionality, I think enhancing support for these external file formats and simplifying configuration steps would be valuable improvements for the service."
"There could be enhancements in the product intelligently covering more scenarios to prevent crashes or failures."
"Whatever solution worked today can not be reused in the next migration."
"The live duplication has a delay of two minutes, which can be an issue."
"What needs improvement in AWS Database Migration Service is that it lacks a log file validation feature. If the solution could provide more details about a particular transaction, that would be helpful. The stability of AWS Database Migration Service for online CDC records also needs to be improved."
"More endpoints need to be supported by AWS Database Migration Service. There's also a need for more control and transparency on the product, including better technical support."
"One area that AWS DMS can improve on is its conversion of data types. For example, in Oracle, you have a data type called RAW, but in PostgreSQL there is no such thing. Thus, AWS DMS doesn't know what type I want to use when migrating from Oracle to PostgreSQL, and when performing the migration, AWS DMS changed the RAW data type to the byte data type, which isn't what I wanted."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"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."
"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."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"I would like to see the price improve."
"The licensing cost is high compared to other options."
"The price has room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For Egypt, the product's prices are high, making it a specific problem in one region and not globally."
"The pricing is per hour, though I do not have the exact figures. If you have specific questions about the service, a personal support team from Amazon is available, but this will bring in additional costs."
"The pricing can be better and it should be more competitive."
"The solution’s pricing is reasonable."
"Cost is the only factor that is challenging."
"AWS Database Migration Service is very inexpensive."
"Pricing for the solution is reasonable, but could still be reduced."
"AWS Database Migration Service is the least expensive solution, but is still expensive."
"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."
"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."
"Based on our team discussions and feedback, it is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."
"Always plan five years ahead and don’t jeopardize the quality of your project by dropping items from the bill of materials."
"Its cost depends on the use cases."
"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."
"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What resources can you use to learn how to utilize AWS Database Migration Service?
As with all AWS products, you are given very useful documentation with AWS Database Migration Service. Before we started using this product, we went over it and we were able to learn the basics an...
Would you recommend AWS Database Migration Service as a cloud data integration tool?
My current company started using AWS Database Migration Service upon my recommendation, and I continue telling people how good of a product it is. However, users should keep in mind a few things. ...
Is AWS Database Migration Service an affordable solution?
Compared to similar solutions, AWS Database Migration Service falls somewhere in the middle price-wise, at least from my experience. This being said, it is not a very affordable solution, especial...
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

AWS Data Migration Service
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Veoci, Trimble, Nasdaq, shaadi.com, Hotelbeds, SysAid, Verizon, Expedia, Pega
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Database Migration Service vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.