We performed a comparison between CloverETL and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."Server features for scheduler: It is very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them. The interface is easy to use."
"No dependence on native language and ease of use."
"Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility."
"Key features include wealth of pre-defined components; all components are customizable; descriptive logging, especially for error messages."
"The messaging part is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"The product supports various types of digital documents, including XMLs and EDI."
"The tool supports gRPC."
"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."
"One [of the most valuable features] is the webMethods Designer. That helps our developers develop on their own. It's very intuitive for design. It helps our developers to speed the development of services for the integrations."
"Resource management: We typically run out of heap space, and even the allocation of high heap space does not seem to be enough."
"Its documentation could be improved."
"Needs: easier automated failure recovery; more, and more intuitive auto-generated/filled-in code for components; easier/more automated sync between CloverETL Designer and CloverETL Server."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution."
"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."
"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."
"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."
"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."
"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CloverETL is ranked 60th in Data Integration while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. CloverETL is rated 7.0, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CloverETL writes "Provides wealth of pre-defined, customizable components, and descriptive logging for errors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". CloverETL is most compared with iWay Universal Adapter Framework, Talend Open Studio and SSIS, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration.
We monitor all 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.