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

Axway AMPLIFY API Management vs SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 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

Axway AMPLIFY API Management
Ranking in API Management
30th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SEEBURGER Business Integrat...
Ranking in API Management
22nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (4th), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (12th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Axway AMPLIFY API Management is 1.6%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is 1.2%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite1.2%
Axway AMPLIFY API Management1.6%
Other97.2%
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2081667 - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Software Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Centralized gateway has strengthened API security and provides deep traffic analytics
Potential areas of improvement or lack of functions in Axway AMPLIFY API Management is a challenging question because even after working for almost six years, I have not been able to touch everything this tool offers. This tool is very comprehensive and useful. However, from my opinion, when there are different dashboards on which the API platform shows monitoring, I expect Axway AMPLIFY API Management to be more visible in terms of showing pre-historic data. In other words, if there is a very large volume or very large number of transactions going on live in production, sometimes it purges the previous data very quickly, leaving only one or two hours of data. When there is very low volume, it can sustain data up to five days. The visibility of the previous historic database is a feature that could be improved. Different tools can be used to empower this capability, such as Splunk or the ELK stack, which includes Elastic. There are different features that could be used, but Axway as an organization would likely implement their specific products. I am simply providing a very basic opinion anonymously and do not want to sound like I am against this organization.
SS
Senior Software Engineer at HCLTech
Exceptional support and reliability drive optimal data flow and integration
The features of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite that I found most valuable are related to entity flow. We can find the entity flow to be very useful so we can grab the flow accordingly. There is no disturbance in the connections, and it is very clear to check the connection flow with applicable queues. When comparing to other applications, SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is the easiest way to understand the application. I have also worked on the cloud services where SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is moving to cloud. I have worked on cloud services where the mapping part is in the cloud itself, along with the connection setup.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution is security."
"There's drag and drop functionality so that you do not need to have a senior expert developer to make use of the tool. You can get more of your staff trained up to be able to use it as it's not overly technical."
"The API portal capability is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are security enforcement and throttling."
"The administration tool for this solution is good."
"We like the portal for documentation a lot."
"Its flexibility allows us to adapt to different scenarios."
"This platform can be highly scalable."
"It is stable and reliable. We have not had any issues."
"Technical support has always been great."
"The stability is world-class. It is as good as any of the other options out there. They have addressed hiccups quickly, professionally, and with an excellent response."
"The solution is flexible when it comes to adding integrations, it is much easier to use than the other tools we have to move the files, and across the board, we can move files in a short amount of time compared to our other existing tools."
"We had a requirement for transferring data to Amazon S3 buckets but we did not have a solution in our shop for large data transfers to Amazon S3. We worked with SEEBURGER and created a framework solution and now, using that solution, we can configure the transfer in an hour or two and enable it to go to existing or new S3 buckets."
"Among the most valuable features are the EDI translator and a lot of the components which enable creating compliance sets. Having something standard out-of-the-box and being able to use that has been a huge benefit for us."
"Of all the projects where people have come to me, I can't remember having to say, "No, we can't do that.""
"SEEBURGER has helped us to enable digital business transformation. Every time we add a new customer, there is a digital footprint. This is no longer a manual process."
 

Cons

"The product shows a lack of maturity. The setup is difficult, the tech support and community are lacking, and it is not very stable."
"The installation process is a bit complex and it could be a lot simpler."
"In terms of customer service, the company needs to be easier to contact, and the support team needs to understand the situation and the product itself better."
"The product shows a lack of maturity. The setup is difficult, the tech support and community are lacking, and it is not very stable."
"Not a ten because of the pricing and technical support."
"I think that the program's team management capabilities can be better as far as working in groups."
"The portal still has room for improvement."
"Sometimes we find bugs where certain calls are not returning all the data we need."
"Java is very old technology and they should move away from it, to anything that's better."
"There are a lot of service packs during the year. I know that part is the process for updating features, but sometimes it's difficult to update service packs every month."
"The speed of development needs improvement. If you acquire any customization, it can be a slightly slow process. I would like to see more flexibility around customizations. The time frame right now depends on the sophistication and customization, but we have to go through a process of getting them to develop, implement, and test it. This might take a couple of weeks. If it was a simpler system to customize, the time could probably be cut by half or down by even 25 percent of what it would normally take."
"The ability to bind a mapping to an agreement seems a bit clunky. It would be nice to have a better way of navigating to a map name rather than using a drop down list."
"We don't have much access to the logs or what's happening. So we have to log a ticket with SEEBURGER. We only get a message that something has failed... we have to open a ticket with SEEBURGER for them to tell us exactly what the issue is... I would like us to be able to be more self-sufficient."
"API connectivity needs improvement as well as the GUI. The GUI hasn't changed that much in 10 years, but of course, that's already been updated. I would say I'm excited about the screenshots but that's about it."
"I don't think the scalability of the solution is that great because they have tied the solution to their named nodes and it does not allow scalability like some of the cloud products allow."
"A person whom I work with, and is not very technical, found the setup complex, as there are a lot of steps."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive. When you acquire a license you have full access to the solution, unlike other competitors such as Apigee X, where there are fragmented licenses. Some licenses only allow access to certain features while others allow access to more features. Upon procuring this solution's license, you will have full access to the solution, allowing you to experiment with all of its features."
"We pay per message we use. We spend about £19,000 a year with them."
"Price and licensing are comparable to other systems. It's well-priced and simple. It's not user-based or anything. It's just per seat, per system. So, it's pretty straight forward. Because it's per system, one system is enough. However, if you want to make it larger, then you can grow with it."
"The cost of the SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) can be considered high. We have elected to have SEEBURGER consulting do the installation. Licensing could also be considered high. However, one would be hard pressed to find another product that does all that this one does."
"I've heard that the solution is cheaper when compared to other products in the market."
"On an annual basis, our support costs, which are based on the licensing, are about £120,000."
"I have had exposure to other big vendors over the years and would have to say the pricing is pretty typical. They all fall into a common pricing range, at least the bigger vendors: Axway, IBM Sterling, Globalscape, and SEEBURGER. They all fall into that mid-tier pricing. So, SEEBURGER is commensurate with other large integration vendors operating in this space. Maybe it is lower than some of the really high-end ones. You can get some of these high-end transactional messaging integration systems, like TIBCO, that tend to be kind of on a higher echelon of pricing. I would say SEEBURGER is more mid-level."
"Pricing has always seemed fair."
"The only thing that would be an improvement would be if they had a cost model whereby you could just pay for what you're actually using. Even if it were a minimum monthly charge that they offered, if you're not utilizing all of that then they should consider a lower tier. That way, they could attract more business."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
8%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding the pricing of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, I would rate it as 7 out of 10.
What needs improvement with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding areas of improvement for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, the cloud functionality needs enhancement. The cloud interface is currently too cluttered, especially when creating new tran...
What is your primary use case for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
I have worked around 3.5 years with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite ( /products/seeburger-business-integration-suite-reviews ). Currently, I am working with WebMethods. Previously, I worked fo...
 

Also Known As

Vordel Application Gateway, Axway API Management Plus, Axway API Management, AMPLIFY API Management
SEEBURGER BIS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Engie Group, Allianz
Altis, Autoliv, Cebi, Cofresco, MoneyGram International, Samsonite Europe, VSP Global, BMW Group, OSRAM, Magna, Lavazza
Find out what your peers are saying about Axway AMPLIFY API Management vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.