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

Axway AMPLIFY API Management vs webMethods.io 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
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in API Management
10th
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), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Axway AMPLIFY API Management is 1.6%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.3%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

Sudhanshu Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
We get stability, scalability, and security
Axway provides good documentation that newcomers can easily follow, but I believe the initial setup would be tough for someone new. Experienced employees know where everything is and how to do their job, so it would be difficult for a new hire to get up to speed. For an experienced person, I give the initial setup a ten out of ten. Deployment can be considered a hundred lines of code and some a thousand lines. For a simple deployment, it takes 10-15 seconds. And if the environment connectivity is good enough to respond and there is some heavy code that is being deployed, it takes around 30-60 seconds max, if we are referring to the cloud, where the connectivity for the long duration of the calls is there. The total deployment time is one minute to finish up. From the industrial point of view, Europe has a major chunk of users followed by, the US, and then Australia or the Asia-Pacific region.
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

"The most valuable feature of the solution is security."
"I don't believe the Salesforce has been fully utilized yet. It gives us quick engagement."
"The best feature of Axway Amplify API Management is its exceptional level of security, which is highly reassuring, coupled with its remarkable capacity to handle substantial volumes of data in impressively efficient turnaround times."
"The administration tool for this solution is good."
"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."
"We like the portal for documentation a lot."
"In general, API governance provides a better experience for providers."
"The most valuable features are security enforcement and throttling."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."
"It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career."
"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is its reliability. It has a lot of great documentation from the service providers. Additionally, it is easy to use."
"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."
 

Cons

"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."
"Areas of improvement include marketing and enhancing the data products area by using ETIs."
"The installation process is a bit complex and it could be a lot simpler."
"The portal still has room for improvement."
"The API Mocking tools need to be improved."
"The areas for enhancement should be improving certain filters within the solution. Although they are generally functional, there are occasional problems that could be more precisely adjusted. Additionally, the solution performs well within its workload limitations, but it may not be suitable for scaling up or managing a larger volume of transactions through the gateway. To address this, it may be necessary to adopt a unique architecture rather than relying on traditional pre-packaged options."
"Team management capabilities could be improved."
"Sometimes we find bugs where certain calls are not returning all the data we need."
"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."
"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."
"It is difficult to maintain."
"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."
"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."
"Support is expensive."
 

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."
"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
"The solution’s pricing is too high."
"Pricing is the number-one downfall. It's too expensive. They could make more money by dropping the price in half and getting more customers. It's the best product there is, but it's too expensive."
"Its cost depends on the use cases."
"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."
"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."
"Currently, the licensing solution for this product is pretty straightforward. The way that Software AG has moved in their licensing agreements is very understandable. It is very easy for you to see where things land. Like most vendors today, they are transaction based. Therefore, just having a good understanding of how many transactions that you are doing a year would be very wise. Luckily, there are opportunities to work with the vendor to get a good understanding of how many transactions you have and what is the right limit for you to fall under."
"The pricing is a yearly license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management 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
18%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
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 do you like most about Axway AMPLIFY API Management?
In general, API governance provides a better experience for providers.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Axway AMPLIFY API Management?
The solution has a yearly subscription. The solution’s pricing is competitive. Axway makes a significant impression compared to its peers, especially with a sensitive budget. In many instances, it ...
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

Vordel Application Gateway, Axway API Management Plus, Axway API Management, AMPLIFY API Management
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Engie Group, Allianz
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Axway AMPLIFY API Management vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.