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

Flowgear vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 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

Flowgear
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
23rd
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
5th
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) (9th), API Management (9th), Cloud Data Integration (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) category, the mindshare of Flowgear is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 8.6%, down from 9.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
 

Featured Reviews

Yugan Pillay - PeerSpot reviewer
A nice interface and good training with helpful data transformation connectors
The data transformation and use of the pre-connectors have been really useful. We are able to clean and convert files before data is ingested into SQL. The workflow allows us to find errors and fix them as well easily. The interface is really nice and easy to learn. The workflow process helps us save time when we need to figure out which part of the workflow is failing. The time spent on fixing issues is reduced drastically. The data transformation connectors are really nice since we are able to work with data in any format. The training material is really good.
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

"Well-managed version control of workflows and the simplicity in promoting workflows through each environment has aided my team in developing workflows for various environments without the risk of losing development work."
"The no-code visual front end, along with pre-built samples, allows someone with very little technical ability to get an integration up and running."
"The Flowgear tool is helping us reduce the manual work that is done."
"The solution has increased efficiency and productivity and saved us time and money."
"Being able to seamlessly make changes to how one can do mapping visually without having to be a seasoned developer is great."
"Great for data flow."
"It has improved our integration with our data supplier."
"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."
"It is good for communicating between the systems and for publishing and subscribing. We can easily retrieve data. It is good in terms of troubleshooting and other things."
"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."
"One of the most important features is that it gives you the possibility to do low-level integration. It provides a lot of features out of the box, and over the years, it has matured so much that any problem that is there in the market can be solved with this product. We can meet any requirements through customizations, transformations, or the logic that needs to be put in. Some of the other products struggle in this aspect. They cannot do things in a certain way, or they have a product limitation, whereas, with webMethods, I have never faced this kind of problem."
"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."
"The Software AG Designer has been great. It's very intuitive."
"EDI is robust and integration with SAP is good."
"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."
 

Cons

"The product needs to improve the self-help tools and samples."
"Currently, when designing and testing larger workflows, the sessions timeout and re-authentications are frequently required."
"The product would be nice if it could provide the deployment features in the lower packages."
"We would like to see more learning videos for beginners."
"The UI could be improved."
"The software itself needs to keep up with the daily demand to service all clients as the need arises."
"The initial setup was a bit complex as we were new."
"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."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"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."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"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."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"​Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There are no hidden costs in addition to the standard licensing fees for webMethods. For corporate organizations, it's a very cheap or fairly priced product, but for growing or small businesses, it's quite expensive. These businesses would probably need to consider an enterprise services bus at some point. Thus, from a pricing point, it closes out non-cooperate businesses."
"There is a license needed to use the webMethods Integration Server."
"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."
"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."
"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."
"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
850,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Flowgear vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.