BizTalk Server vs SWIFTnet FIN comparison

Microsoft and SWIFT are both solutions in the Business-to-Business Middleware category. Microsoft is ranked #8 with an average rating of 6.8, while SWIFT is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0. Microsoft holds a 4.7% mindshare in BBM, compared to SWIFT’s 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 75% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of SWIFT users who would recommend it.

BizTalk Server

Read 16 BizTalk Server reviews

1,370 Views
589 Comparison Views

75% willing to recommend

SWIFTnet FIN

Read 2 SWIFTnet FIN reviews

579 Views
579 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

BizTalk Server

SWIFTnet FIN

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BizTalk Server and SWIFTnet FIN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Business-to-Business Middleware solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed BizTalk Server vs. SWIFTnet FIN Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

BizTalk Server vs. SWIFTnet FIN

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

BizTalk Server

Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware

8th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (12th)

SWIFTnet FIN

Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware

9th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Business-to-Business Middleware category, the mindshare of BizTalk Server is 4.7%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SWIFTnet FIN is 4.5%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Business-to-Business Middleware Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
BizTalk Server	4.7%
SWIFTnet FIN	4.5%
Other	90.8%

Business-to-Business Middleware

Featured Reviews

Taqi-Hasan

Senior Application Specialist at Taqa Distribution

Offers valuable integration services but requires better cloud adaptation

Biztalk server doesn't have API management so that our exposed can be protected against the SQL injection, DOS attacks. However, this is available in IBM WebMethods. The positive impact of BizTalk Server was initially limited because of scalability issues. That is the reason why management has decided to implement IBM WebMethods. We are going to decommission BizTalk Server next year. I believe the API response could be improved in BizTalk Server. We need to increase the number of servers in BizTalk Server. We used to have two servers; later on, we increased to a third server, which has improved performance. We can make it more highly available and scale out to improve BizTalk Server. Scale out means we can increase the number of servers horizontally.

Read full review

Viktor Kelemen

Swift Administrator at OTP Bank Hungary

Reliability and support ensure secure financial messaging over decades

The most valuable feature of SWIFTnet FIN is its reliability. For a bank, reliability is the most critical aspect. We also appreciate the extensive support facilities available worldwide. SWIFTnet FIN's services provide us with reliable connections to entities like European Central Bank, and we plan to join CLS as a direct member through SWIFTnet FIN. The store and forward feature, along with real-time messaging services, are crucial for our operations. Their security measures and compliance with CSP program ensure the highest safety standards. Audits and assessments by companies like KPMG and Ernst & Young further validate SWIFTnet FIN's reliability.

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

"I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten."

"We can handle a large number of messages without any issues, ensuring that everything runs smoothly."

"Essentially, you can do whatever you like with these systems, and you do not have to take care about the scaling because if one server is overloaded, it just forwards the message to the next server, even if it were designated to a specific server. It weeds out the messages according to the load. If you want to scale it, you just add new servers."

"The BizTalk Server business rule engine was very useful for us and has helped us for the last 12 years."

"The most valuable feature is its reliability and stability. The first version of BizTalk was released in 2000, and many companies still use it. It was stable until 2013 when we had support."

"Compared to the current solutions I use, like Azure Logic Apps and other cloud services, BizTalk was far better and more reliable."

"The most valuable feature of BizTalk Server is that it will turn XML into flexible transactions."

More BizTalk Server pros

"It provides the ability to interact with financial institutions and apply the same rules."

"The most valuable feature of SWIFTnet FIN is its reliability."

Cons

"It's an on-premises system, requiring physical servers for deployment. This is different from Azure; you don't need any servers with Azure. If you have a subscription, you can do whatever you want. There are unit restrictions based on the environment (like non-production vs. production) in BizTalk. You need physical servers and databases. In Azure, those are not required – it's all in the cloud."

"BizTalk Server is an outdated legacy system that does not support messaging."

"The deployment could be simplified."

"BizTalk Server needs improvements, especially because we use it for EDI messaging, and it would be very useful to have enhanced tracking capabilities for message tracking and archiving of messages."

"We want to get rid of BizTalk Server, as there is unnecessary license cost, and there are some limitations, so we might go for Azure Integration Services."

"The product could be improved in monitoring, managing, and support functionalities."

"I didn't find anything particularly valuable in BizTalk Server. It didn't help me, and we are moving away from BizTalk Server to a new platform."

"Updating things in BizTalk is a headache."

More BizTalk Server cons

"I would like for them to work in real-time."

"While SWIFTnet FIN is a robust system, there is room for minor improvements in scalability and installation complexity."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"BizTalk Server is cheap. I would rate its pricing a two out of five."

"BizTalk Server is not freeware. There's a significant licensing cost involved. Be sure you will actually utilize its features fully."

"Based on the knowledge, it is relatively cheaper than Azure Identity Services and cloud services in general."

"The solution is expensive."

"The cost will depend on the client's requirements."

"It was not cheap, but it was affordable."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business-to-Business Middleware solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

11%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

53%

Manufacturing Company

Non Tech Company

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Large Enterprise	9

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BizTalk Server?

The tool's most valuable feature is its integration with the banks. Its messaging and routing capabilities are good.

See all answers

What needs improvement with BizTalk Server?

I am generally satisfied with BizTalk Server, but there are some gaps, as we have multiple integration tools. Thus, there is associated cost, operation cost, license cost, and CapEx, so we are tryi...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering BizTalk Server?

I have not worked with Amazon API Gateway or Mule ESB; I am just testing them. I am using Boomi iPaaS and WebMethods. I did not purchase it on AWS Marketplace; those are product API systems, and in...

See all answers

What needs improvement with SWIFTnet FIN?

While SWIFTnet FIN is a robust system, there is room for minor improvements in scalability and installation complexity. Simplifying installation processes, especially for new users, could enhance i...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for SWIFTnet FIN?

We use SWIFTnet FIN ( /products/swiftnet-fin-reviews ) for almost everything, including international payments and sending files. It's essential for various financial messaging, such as file act, e...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering SWIFTnet FIN?

Overall, SWIFTnet FIN is a highly reliable system with excellent support and security measures. While it's not perfect in scalability and installation, the system aligns well with our needs. I rate...

See all answers

Comparisons

SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vs BizTalk Server

Compared 13% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs BizTalk Server

Compared 11% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs BizTalk Server

Compared 10% of the time

IBM BPM vs BizTalk Server

Compared 9% of the time

Camunda vs BizTalk Server

Compared 9% of the time

More BizTalk Server Competitors

SWIFT InterAct vs SWIFTnet FIN

Compared 45% of the time

Tieto Business Information eXchange vs SWIFTnet FIN

Compared 25% of the time

IBM B2B Cloud Services vs SWIFTnet FIN

Compared 11% of the time

Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) vs SWIFTnet FIN

Compared 10% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs SWIFTnet FIN

Compared 9% of the time

More SWIFTnet FIN Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BizTalk Server

January 2026

Download BizTalk Server product report

Buyer's Guide

Business-to-Business Middleware

January 2026

Download SWIFTnet FIN product report

Overview

Connects systems both inside and across organizations, exchange data and orchestrate business processes across multiple systems.

Microsoft

FIN enables financial institutions to exchange individual structured (MT and ISO 15022 message formats) financial messages securely and reliably. FIN is used by over 10,800 financial institutions and their corporate customers worldwide to exchange over 22.3+ million messages per day across a wide range of business areas within the banking and securities industries.

FIN value-added processing includes:

Message validation to ensure messages are formatted according to SWIFT message standards.
Delivery monitoring and prioritization.
Message storage and retrieval.

It is based on a distributed processing architecture with full, built-in redundancy to ensure maximum availability.

SWIFT

Sample Customers

Centrebet, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, QualCare, Wªrth Handelsges.m.b.H, DTEK, Allscripts, United BioSource, Hogg Robinson

Alcatel-Lucent, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Canadian National Railway, General Electric Company, Huawei, Novartis International, Standard Bank, UniCredit, Volvo

Buyer's Guide

BizTalk Server vs. SWIFTnet FIN

December 2025

Free Report: BizTalk Server vs. SWIFTnet FIN

Find out what your peers are saying about BizTalk Server vs. SWIFTnet FIN and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BizTalk Server vs. SWIFTnet FIN report.

See our list of best Business-to-Business Middleware vendors.

We monitor all Business-to-Business Middleware 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.